Psalm Righteousness

Being Christian should mean being pro-life

Women Against Abortion recently posted on their Facebook and their Twitter a photo that is a link to this t-shirt. The design reads, “R U Pro-Choice or Christian?” There is a circle between the R and U containing the words “You Can’t Be Both.”

When I shared the link on my wall, I was met with some less than happy comments. People of course don’t like you questioning their faith. This is understandable, especially considering that many of us who call ourselves Christians go against one teaching or another of the Church. However, to be pro-choice and call one’s self a Christian is too serious an issue for one to go against the church on. Such a t-shirt design as this may seem radical, but that’s what gets people’s attention. Such sayings which people often take to be radical oftentimes also speak the truth, even if people don’t want to believe it or cannot admit that they do.

Abortion is not directly listed anywhere in the Bible. That does not mean that abortion is advocated in Christianity. In the Ten Commandments, there is certainly an order against abortion, with the sixth being “thou shalt not kill” (Exodus 20:13). From there, one only has to read Psalms to know that God cares about the unborn and wishes for us to do the same. “Truly children are a gift from the Lord; the fruit of the womb is a reward” (Psalm 127:3). The one that speaks the most to me, though, is this set of verses: “You knit me in my mother’s womb … nor was my frame unknown to you when I was made in secret” (Psalm 139:13, 15). God also helps and calls the pre-born child. “You have been my guide since I was first formed … from my mother’s womb you are my God” (Psalm 22:10-11).

Such verses are compiled alongside other verses and reasons from Scripture why abortion is not compatible with Christianity. As Priests for Life, the site compiling such scripture readings, states, “Jesus Christ paid special attention to the poor, the despised, and those whom the rest of society considered insignificant.” Such is not only a religious way of looking at abortion through the views Jesus Christ; it also applies to the present world, where the unborn are often regarded as insignificant.

There are individuals and entire organizations who declare Christian faith while also advocating for the “right” of abortion. Catholics for Choice, in a statement about their work, as well as a statement pertaining specifically to abortion, recognizes “individual conscience of each person is recognized as the keystone of moral decision making.” These Christians who advocate for such a “right” may believe themselves to be Christians and that they are following the Christian doctrine faithfully enough. They are Christians in name though. In lacking the fundamental belief in the right to life, for all human beings created in God’s image, they are lacking a belief far too important. As long as they are without such a belief, they are not Christian to the fullest extent which they can be.

Recently, the pro-life community and news sources have been all over reporting on Faith Aloud’s and Clergy for Choice creation of a 40 Days of Prayer. Except this prayer campaign is for something which God can never honor, because it’s for the process of abortion, which kills off countless numbers of his creation.

Also, recently it was announced that the Reverend Harry Knox, who served as a Obama faith adviser, will be head of a pro-abortion religious group, the Religious Coalition on Reproductive Choice.  A Lifenews article recently reported that, Reverend Dr. Alethea Smith-Withers, chair of the RCRC board of directors, said, “In the current climate of relentless attacks on abortion and birth control in the name of religion, our country needs the faith-inspired courage Reverend Knox brings to safeguarding and advancing women’s health and the dignity of all people.”

To reiterate, you can advance women’s health without advocating for a procedure like abortion. Abortion also completely refutes the last part of Dr. Smith-Withers’s statement, because “the dignity of all people” is not upheld through abortion. It can’t be when at least one life ends from it as a result. The first statement also bothers me, though, because such attacks are not “relentless” and just “in the name of religion.” I am indeed speaking on behalf of my religion, but also of a religion that cannot advocate for the killing of the unborn and still keep to Church teachings.

The Church, has nothing against individual conscience, just as long as it doesn’t contribute to killing of the unborn. As a Christian, I could not reconcile being Christian but not pro-life. Being pro-abortion does not match up with Christian teachings in any way. The way in which the organization uses the phrase “individual conscience[,]” it is likely that Catholics for Choice would tell me that my decision to be pro-life is based on my individual conscience. The page about their work even states that I have to “respect others’ right to do the same.” Just as the church realizes that people have “individual consciences,” the Church also affirms respecting the rights of others. But this once again does not mean allowing the killing of the unborn. And unlike in the case of organizations such as Catholics for Choice, the Church recognizes and respects the rights of the unborn as well.

As for Christians who follow denominations which may be pro-choice, I would ask them to ultimately refer to what Jesus would do. Jesus asks believers to follow his example of caring for those who are insignificant, marginalized or despised by society, which the unborn certainly are to some people. He also does not, as God does not want, us to advocate for the killing of those who are also God’s creation in God’s image. One can be pro-life and know in their heart it is the Christian thing to do, even if their domination is not inherently. It is the Christian thing to do to be pro-life when it all comes back to following Jesus first and foremost. The Bible is full of too many examples as to why the unborn is also a human person, and therefore killing them cannot be advocated.

It’s not just that I can’t reconcile being Christian and not pro-life. Rather, I don’t understand how anyone else could, either. One’s stance on abortion is not, and can never be, an issue where one is merely on the sidelines. Of course, being pro-abortion is not merely being on the sidelines. But, it is doing so without being Christian. If we are to call ourselves true Christians, then we have to not only stay off the sidelines, but do so with a consistently Christian perspective.

Even my boyfriend, who was once pro-choice because according to him he never had to really think about the issue before we met, was ultimately convinced not only by me. In sharing our views at a pro-life event while visiting a friend’s college campus, he shared that it was also his Catholic faith which made him realize he couldn’t be anything but pro-life.

Of course, there are people and organizations which are pro-life and are of other faiths or no faith at all. Secular Pro-Life is one such organization I especially commend. I believe in all pro-life people and organizations uniting, regardless of their faith or lack thereof. For whatever reason, they consider it important in standing up for life.

There are persons who are pro-choice, who also consider themselves to be Christians. They may be Christian according to their own conscience. One may consider the definition of a Christian to be simply someone who believes in Jesus Christ as the Son of God and the Savior of the world. But a Christian should also seek to grow in his or her faith in order to have that true, complete faith. It is like a spiritual journey. And while we may all be in different parts of our spiritual journey, one of the first parts of a spiritual journey in being truly compatible with Christ’s beliefs should involve being pro-life. To truly believe in Jesus I believe that one should be willing to follow his teachings, including fighting for the unborn.

I do not seek to address Christians who claim to be pro-choice in order to shame them or condemn them. We are all imperfect humans, and we all make mistakes. I just ask that they more carefully examine their faith. These people need to ask themselves if they truly feel in their hearts that such views can be compatible – not only with the rest of their faith, but with the God they pray to.

  • Oedipa

    “I just ask that they more carefully examine their faith”

    I ask that you more carefully examine the Bible. It is notoriously noncommittal regarding abortion (except, of course, if one is predisposed to take a literal reading of Exodus 21:22-25, in which damage to a fetus is subject to monetary compensation, tantamount to have wasted a man’s seed).

    You’re obviously free to enlist in congregations that cultivate their own beliefs on the subject and promulgate those beliefs. But you’re woefully off the mark to suggest congregations are “mistaken” or “imperfect” if they have the temerity to concentrate on Jesus’s concern for the poor, the hungry, the thirsty, the “least of these”, social justice in general and don’t convert their mission into a single-issue theology.

    • Natalie

      Thou shall not kill. Where in the bible does it say that we do not live while in the womb? God does not form lifeless beings in the womb. Therefore not killing people while in the womb should go without saying. That damage you speak of was punishable.. “If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman’s husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. And if any mischief follow then thou shalt give life for life”. It sounds like it wasn’t taken as lightly as you make it out to be.

      • First Citizen

        I have to agree the Bible is strong on abortion. What else do you have to read beside Thou Shall Not Murder? The unborn is a person hence subject to that rule. The Bible always calls a pregnant women a women with child, obviously confirming the belief that the unborn is human.
        For Life
        visit my blog at 
        aconstitutionalconservative.blogspot.com
        or
        pro-lifeaction.blogspot.com

      • Oedipa

        Why does Judah call his daughter-in-law Tamar to be burnt alive whilst pregnant? For violating God’s laws against whoredom. Genesis 38:24.

        Why, when God entertains wrath and retribution against whole peoples, does it including the unborn? Hosea 13:16 (“The people of Samaria must bear their guilt, because they have rebelled
        against their God. They will fall by the sword; their little ones will
        be dashed to the ground, their pregnant women ripped open.”).

        Why is it prescribed in Numbers 5:21-29 that wives accused of adultery are to be given a poisonous drink, an abortifacient, if you will, to rot and curse her and her belly?

        Now, I realize these are all Old Testament, and God advocates some pretty vile and nasty things in the Old Testament. But, then, the Ten Commandments are there, too. Which circles me back to my original point: the Bible, and the faiths that it inspires, take many forms. Ms. Downs and LiveAction doesn’t have a prerogative to proclaim pro-choice Christians or Jews “mistaken” or “imperfect”.

        • First Citizen

          Many scholars do not believe the drink to which you were referring was caused abortion, read the entire passage.

          Judah not God commanded Tamar’s death, God’s punishment of adultery was death, but there is a distinction in this passage. 

          The hebrew and greek word for child also refers to the unborn.

    • http://twitter.com/CalFreiburger Calvin Freiburger

      That’s like saying the bible is notoriously noncommittal regarding drive-by shootings. Of course it doesn’t waste time talking about particular *methods* of abortion; the fact that the Bible (a) condemns murder generally and (b) is pretty clear that babies in the womb are live children of God should be more than sufficient to establish where the faith stands on abortion.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Daniel-Durham/100002906757423 Daniel Durham

      “But you’re woefully off the mark to suggest congregations are “mistaken”
      or “imperfect” if they have the temerity to concentrate on Jesus’s
      concern for the poor, the hungry, the thirsty, the “least of these”,
      social justice in general and don’t convert their mission into a
      single-issue theology.”

      I think you’re missing his point here. He’s not saying abortion is the only or most important evil, just that it is an evil and must be opposed.

    • Jordan Elizabeth

      Exodus 21:22-25, ESV: “When men strive together and hit a pregnant woman, so that her children come out, but there is no harm, the one who hit her shall surely be fined, as the woman’s husband shall impose on him, and he shall pay as the judges determine. But if there is harm, then you shall pay life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.”

      NIV: “If people are fighting and hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman’s husband demands and the court allows. But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise.”

      NASB: “If men struggle with each other and strike a woman with child so that she gives birth prematurely, yet there is no injury, he shall surely be fined as the woman’s husband may demand of him, and he shall pay as the judges decide. But if there is any further injury, then you shall appoint as a penalty life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise.” [italics theirs]

      NLT: “Now suppose two men are fighting, and in the process they accidentally strike a pregnant woman so she gives birth prematurely. If no further injury results, the man who struck the woman must pay the amount of compensation the woman’s husband demands and the judges approve. But if there is further injury, the punishment must match the injury: a life for a life, an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, a hand for a hand, a foot for a foot, a burn for a burn, a wound for a wound, a bruise for a bruise.”

      NKJV: “If men fight, and hurt a woman with child, so that she gives birth prematurely, yet no harm follows, he shall surely be punished accordingly as the woman’s husband imposes on him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. But if any harm follows, then you shall give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.” [italics theirs]

      I believe I covered all of the major versions [quotations copy/pasted from BibleGateway.com]. The key phrase is, of course, is “so her children come out, but there is no harm;” “and she gives birth prematurely but there is no serious injury;” “so that she gives birth prematurely, yet there is no injury;” “so she gives birth prematurely. If no further injury results;” or “so that she gives birth prematurely, yet no harm follows” — FOLLOWED BY a monetary claim. BUT** “if there is harm;” “if there is serious injury;” “if there is any further injury;” “if there is further injury;” or “if any harm follows,” then the punishment shall be LIFE FOR LIFE, i.e., if you kill that unborn baby, you die.
      But please, challenge all the different versions of the Bible, and we will do a Hebrew word study on the difference between “yasa” [to bring forth, as in a child; used in this passage] and “nepel” [to miscarry or abort; NOT used in this passage]. Or, you could go to Stand to Reason’s website for a word study if you’d like [http://www.str.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5700].

    • Jordan Elizabeth

      Now, did I read that closely and literally enough for you, or would you like me to go back in time and ask Moses to clarify?

      • Oedipa

        Since we’re talking Old Testament, I’ll stick with the Jewish Biblical exegesis, which conforms to my interpretation — the murder of the mother leads to an eye for an eye, a life for a life; the miscarriage of the fetus is penalized as the husband would see fit.

        Nonetheless, I grant that there are other interpretations. You didn’t need to post half a dozen different translations to convince me of that. Which leads me back to my point: the bible is not only non-commital on the subject, it’s meanings are disputed when the subject does indeed come up.

        • Jordan Elizabeth

          My point was this: once upon a time, some people translated the verse to say “miscarry.” Now, we realize this is incorrect: the word (a combo of yeled and yasa) literally means “to bring forth.” It is used 1,061 times in the OT, and in no other situation does it refer to a miscarriage or the bringing forth of anything dead; it refers to life. If Moses actually meant “miscarry” or “abort,” he had other words to use! Twice in the Mosaic books of law the word “sakal” (to be bereaved) is used to mean “miscarry.” Sakal is used twice more in the OT, once translated “miscarry,” once translated “abort.” The word “nepel” (to miscarry or to abort) is used three times in the OT.

          Additionally, even if there was only a fine, THERE WAS STILL A PUNISHMENT. It was wrong.

          But finally, we’re dealing with modern-day Christians in the article, who typically use ESV, NIV, NASB, NLT, or NKJV. So it is entirely compatable with our bible, and we HAVE read our bible closely, even if outdated versions (think KJV) have a word translated incorrectly.

    • Stevebrock

      How can you say the Bible is noncommital regarding abortion? Is clearly states that you shall not kill. It also commands us to go forth and multiply and fill the earth. It also always and only speaks of children as blessings. It also speaks of babys in the womb, such as John the Baptist, who leapt for joy. Do you not consider depriving life from somebody as murder? The Bible is also notoriously noncommittal regarding shooting people, or poisoning them, or coveting their car…

      • Oedipa

        Why does Judah call his daughter-in-law Tamar to be burnt alive
        whilst pregnant? For violating God’s laws against whoredom. Genesis
        38:24.

        Why, when God entertains wrath and retribution against whole peoples,
        does it including the unborn? Hosea 13:16 (“The people of Samaria must
        bear their guilt, because they have rebelled against their God. They will fall by the sword; their little ones will be dashed to the ground, their pregnant women ripped open.”).

        Why is it prescribed in Numbers 5:21-29 that wives accused of
        adultery are to be given a poisonous drink, an abortifacient, if you
        will, to rot and curse her and her belly?

        Now, I realize these are all Old Testament, and God advocates some
        pretty vile and nasty things in the Old Testament. But, then, the Ten
        Commandments are there, too. Which circles me back to my original point:
        the Bible, and the faiths that it inspires, take many forms. Ms. Downs
        and LiveAction doesn’t have a prerogative to proclaim pro-choice
        Christians or Jews “mistaken” or “imperfect”.
         

    • MoonChild02

      The references to Gehenna are references to abortion. In the Valley of Hinnom, there was a group of people, the Ammonites, who
      sacrificed to their god, Moloch/Baal. This sacrifice was of both born
      and unborn children. They were taken from their mothers’ wombs, cut
      open, their blood drained, and then their bodies burnt. Any time these
      things are brought up in the Bible, it is referring directly to abortion and infanticide. Here are a few examples:

      Amos 1:13, “Thus saith the Lord: For three crimes of the children of Ammon, and for
      four I will not convert him: because he hath ripped up the women with
      child of Galaad to enlarge his border.”

      2 Kings 8:12, “And Hazael asked, ‘Why are you weeping, my lord?’
      Elisha replied, ‘Because I know the evil that you will inflict upon the
      Israelites. You will burn their fortresses, you will slay their youth
      with the sword, you will dash their little children to pieces, you will
      rip open their pregnant women.'”

      Jeremiah, 32:35, “They built high places to Baal in the
      Valley of Ben-hinnom, and immolated their sons and daughters to Molech,
      bringing sin upon Judah; this I never commanded them, nor did it even
      enter My mind that they should practice such abominations.”

      2 Chronicles, 28:3, “Moreover, he offered sacrifice in the
      Valley of Ben-hinnom, and immolated his sons by fire according to the
      abominable practice of the nations which the LORD had cleared out before
      the Israelites.”

      The Book of Psalms, chapter 106, “34 They did not destroy the peoples as
      the LORD had commanded them, 35 But mingled with the nations and
      imitated their ways. 36 They worshiped their idols and were ensnared by
      them. 37 They sacrificed to the gods their own sons and daughters, 38
      Shedding innocent blood, the blood of their own sons and daughters, Whom
      they sacrificed to the idols of Canaan, desecrating the land with
      bloodshed.”

      The Gospel of St. Matthew, chapter 18:

      1 At that time the disciples approached Jesus and said, “Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?”

      2 He called a child over, placed it in their midst, 3 and said,
      “Amen, I say to you, unless you turn and become like children, you will
      not enter the kingdom of heaven. 4 Whoever humbles himself like this
      child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. 5 And whoever receives
      one child such as this in My name receives Me.

      6 “Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to
      sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone hung around
      his neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea. 7 Woe to the world
      because of things that cause sin! Such things must come, but woe to the
      one through whom they come! 8 If your hand or foot causes you to sin,
      cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to enter into life
      maimed or crippled than with two hands or two feet to be thrown into
      eternal fire. 9 And if your eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw
      it away. It is better for you to enter into life with one eye than with
      two eyes to be thrown into fiery Gehenna.

      10 “See that you do not despise one of these little ones, for I say
      to you that their angels in heaven always look upon the face of my
      heavenly Father.”

      It should also be mentioned that the above Gospel message of St. Matthew is paralleled in the Gospel of St. Luke, chapter 18. To refer to children in the passage by St. Luke, the term brephos is used. It is the same term used when referring to St. John the Baptist in Luke 1:41,44, “And it came to pass that when Elizabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the infant leaped in her womb… ‘For behold as soon as the voice of your salutation sounded in my ears, the infant in my womb leaped for joy.'” Brephos is also used to refer to Jesus as a newborn infant in Luke 2:12,16, “‘And this shall be a sign unto you. You shall find the infant wrapped in
      swaddling clothes and laid in a manger.’…And they came with haste:
      and they found Mary and Joseph, and the infant lying in the manger.” In other words, the same term is used to refer to an unborn child, a newborn child, and older children.

  • Edgarbrightman

     Of course, being pro-abortion is not merely being on the sidelines. But, it is doing so without being Christian.  Soooo, all abortions are what? unchristian?  Can you not think of at least one situation which would challenge that claim?

    • Patriciakmartin

       Yes, abortion is unchristian.  What if you mom had done this to you… Have you seen the results of an abortion, what is called “products of conception”?  I have.

    • PointeforJesus

      The only thing I can think of is if the mother is going to die and the baby is not yet viable. We had some friends who had to do that.
      If the mothers life is in danger but there is a possibility that the baby could survive, I don’t know. My instinct would be to pray for a miracle or try to induce if the baby’s viable. But I really don’t know.

      • peach

         And that is why abortion has to stay legal.  If it were illegal, your friend would be dead.

        • First Citizen

          Actually few pro-lifers would say that a law banning abortion would ban abortion in the case of a pregnancy endangering the woman’s life, in that instance the doctor has the duty to attempt to save these both or at least one of these lives. If saving both is impossible (because the baby is inviable) than he must save one (the mothers) this action may inadvertently kill the baby, but that is a foreseeable unfortunate result that was not intended. This is far different than most abortions which sole purpose is to take the life of the unborn child. Accidentally killing someone in an attempt of saving another is different than purposely pursuing that goal of murder, which is the purpose of most abortions.  
          For Life 
          First Citizen
          visit my blog at;
          aconstitutionconservative.blogspot.com
          or 
          pro-lifeaction.blogspot.com

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=681473501 Clarissa Masnaghetti

      When it is necessary to save the life of the mother, and the only time that an abortion could ever be considered such is an ectopic pregnancy.  There are other treatments necessary to sustain the mother’s life that may lead to fetal demise, but an ectopic pregnancy is the only time an actual abortion must take place.

    • First Citizen

      The reason abortion is wrong is because it kills a unborn baby, in other words a full fledged member of the human community.
      For Life,
      First Citizen
      visit my blog at,
      aconstitutionalconservative.blogspot.com
      or pro-lifeaction.blogspot.com

    • Jordan Elizabeth

      Yeah, a few Christians have had abortions (we’re human beings and luckily believe in forgiveness), but there is no such thing as a “Christian” abortion any more that there is such thing as a Christian murder or a Christian rape.

    • Stevebrock

      If abortion is wrong because it is killing (murdering) an innocent child, then no, I cannot think of any situation where that could be considered Christian? Can you?

  • Kristen M

    I had a dream about a month or so back. In this dream I was facing a church congregation, I was talking about abortion. In the dream I posed a question. What if Jesus was pro-choice? What if Jesus said “I don’t need to die and save these “people” they aren’t even born yet.”? The only ones that would have benefited from his death and resurrection would have been the ones that were living during his crucifixion. We would not have the privilege to call ourselves Christians because he wouldn’t have died for us. Thankful, Jesus saw all life precious even ones that would live long after he died and rose again. Thankful he looked into the future and saw each one of us individually. He didn’t see us as expendible fetuses. He saw each of us as an individual person worth dying for. He saw that we were worth it even though we weren’t even thoughts in anybody’s mind at the time of his death. While we might not be able to look into the future and see actually faces and names like Jesus did, if he thought those who had yet to be born were worth it, we too should see the unborn as worth fighting for. I am throughly convinced now more than ever since that dream that being pro-choice is incompatible with being a Christian.

    • Mara

       Your comment literally made me just say “O wow” aloud. I have actual goosebumps. I will have to meditate on this and remember this.

    • http://www.facebook.com/MikeCassiandlilmonstersPowell Cassandra Sabrina Powell

      I am right there with Kristen! In fact I want to share it!

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=640663095 Shalene Kearney

    Good for you, Rebecca, for taking a stand! You are absolutely correct. The problem with going with our “individual conscience” in situations like this, and calling it good, is that not only were your verses supporting the value of unborn life is also Jeremiah 17:9 that states that our hearts are deceitful (which is also what often guides our “conscience” if it isn’t the Lord.)
    As for you, Edgarbrightman, I can think of NO situation that would challenge that claim. There are certainly situations that make continuing a pregnancy difficult, or even dangerous. Jesus never told us our walks and obedience to Him would be easy. In fact, obedience to Him is often NOT easy. I have nothing but the utmost care, sympathy and respect for someone that has found themselves in one of these situations (pregnancy as a result of rape or life threatening illness.) However, it does not negate what God’s Word says. We would not kill an infant to alleviate the suffering of a mother, why would we do it pre-birth?

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/J7TEND5IIMDFRNZJOEUJK6WUYE BobL

    If, as a Christian, you believe that God imbues each human with a soul, and, unless you believe that does not occur until the baby comes through the birth canal, then being for abortion is betting AGAINST GOD that you know when God imbues a pre-born baby with a soul.  That is a bet–waging MY eternal soul–that I will never make.

  • Rev. Joe

    The claim is made that the Bible doesn’t mention abortion and thus it must be acceptable.  Beyond being an illogical conclusion based on shifting definitions of personhood and murder, it’s also blatantly false!  This issue isn’t that the Bible doesn’t mention abortion; the issue is that the Greek word used for abortion “pharmakeia,” from which we get our word pharmacy, is translated in English as “witchcraft.  Specifically it refers to potion-making, commonly chemical abortifacients.  The same word appears in Rev. 22:15.  This word was understood in the first century to refer to abortions.  The clearest early-church demonstration of this word meaning “abortion” very specifically is found in the Didache.

    Of theological significance is that EVERY single time scripture discusses the killing of children, it’s  contextually connected to the practice of magical arts.  I could go into more detail, but I recommend beginning at Leviticus 20:1-6 as a starting place for further research.

  • Elise77

    The only question I would ask a person who claimed to be a Christian but supported “choice” would be, “Do you know what abortion is and what it does?” If they can demonstrate an understanding of abortion and still support it, they are NOT. CHRISTIAN.

    Abortion is heinous. Abortion is so ugly that those who practice it fight tooth and nail to
    keep the details secret (John 3:20), even from the women they practice it on. Abortion is a small, helpless human being struggling and writhing in pain as forceps tear it apart bit by bit. Abortion is a tiny human face on a tiny severed head. Abortion is a bloody container full of delicate little body parts in a dumpster. Abortion is a woman weeping as she contemplates the above. Abortion is the void she feels deep inside her. Abortion is murder for hire.

    To God, abortion is like taking the clay from the sculptor’s hands just as it is taking the shape He intended, and smashing it. Except that the sculpture is living and unique. Not simply a masterpiece, but a beloved child.

    If you understand all of that, if you have seen with your own eyes what abortion is, and you still support a person’s “right” to “choose” that for another human being, then any claim to Christianity rings hollow. And choosing ignorance doesn’t excuse you. There are atheists who, even without any divine insight, still advocate for helpless children in the womb. What is the excuse of a Christian, who is instructed to “Open your mouth for the speechless, In the cause of all who are appointed to die” (Proverbs 31:8)?

    And again in Proverbs 24:11Rescue those being led away to death;
        hold back those staggering toward slaughter.
    12 If you say, “But we knew nothing about this,”
        does not he who weighs the heart perceive it?
    Does not he who guards your life know it?
        Will he not repay everyone according to what they have done?In short, I agree: Pro-“choice” “Christians” need to pick a side. God’s not neutral on the subject.

    • Oedipa

      “If they can demonstrate an understanding of abortion and still support it, they are NOT. CHRISTIAN”

      Maybe you should convert to Buddhism, because as far as I know, they’re the only major faith that has a blanket prohibition on abortion. Chistianity doesn’t, Judaism certainly doesn’t, even Islam doesn’t.

      It strikes me as hypocritical that the very same folks who have been pulling their hair out over supposed transgressions against religious freedom, vis-a-vis our country’s HHS decisions, won’t allow the freedom of interpretation of the bible, the freedom to worship as they choose. You’re free to proselytize. But it’s not your prerogative to dismiss others’ faith when it doesn’t comport with your own, particularly when there’s such wide swaths of the Abrahamic faiths that don’t subscribe to your rigid stance.

      • http://twitter.com/CalFreiburger Calvin Freiburger

        If I were you, I’d reconsider your theological commentaries that the rest of the commenters have been tearing apart before I took another crack at the “Christianity isn’t anti-abortion” angle.

        And I like how you always manage to find new and innovative ways to completely distort the issue:

        “the very same folks who have been pulling their hair out over supposed
        transgressions against religious freedom, vis-a-vis our country’s HHS
        decisions, won’t allow the freedom of interpretation of the bible, the
        freedom to worship as they choose.”

        This is even more preposterous than the last mischaracterization you pretended not to know you were peddling. The transgressions against religious freedom we criticize are actual, literal transgressions on religious freedom, i.e., government placing tangible limits and mandates on human action. But by using an arcane craft known as “reading,” you should be able to glean that what the pro-life commentary here is doing is criticizing an idea, not advocating any sort of constraint on anyone’s ability to believe or advocate that idea.

        Since this sort of thing tends to happen a lot with you, I have to ask: are you on the level? You sure you’re not really a secret pro-lifer trying to imitate the abortion movement’s disingenuous, anti-rational nature to make them look bad?

        • Oedipa

          I’m not going to squabble with you about whether or not there are Christian sects that accept reproductive rights. I’m not going to squabble with you about whether the majority of Jewish sects accept reproductive rights. I’m not going to squabble with you about Muslim scholars’ designation of four months in the womb as the beginning of personhood. Squabbling  won’t make any of those things less true.

          Just hear this:  I don’t take dismissals of my faith — or anyone’s faith
          — lightly. Elise thinks she knows what is “NOT. CHRISTIAN”. Ms. Downs
          dances around it a little more tactfully, but in the end can’t resist
          the money shot: implying that, for having the temerity to subscribe to a
          more liberal sect of Christianity, we’re “imperfect humans”.

          You can’t whitewash that kind of sectarian bigotry, no matter how seriously you take Notre Dame students and Caritas nurses given easier access to The Pill.

          • http://twitter.com/CalFreiburger Calvin Freiburger

            I’m not dismissing your faith. You are.

            You’re making a mockery of it by perpetrating the lie that murder-for-convenience can be Christian. You’re substituting your will for God’s. You’re pushing sophistry and pretending it’s Truth.

            A word of advice: if you’re failing so miserably at making that case here, then I wouldn’t be too optimistic about your chances of persuading ‘em at the Pearly Gates.

  • Joshinchrist77

    This is such twisted garbage i dont even know where to begin. So one cannot be a christian and be pro choice even though the bible says nothing about abortion??? Id refute the rest of this nonsense but i dont feek like writing an essay.

  • Pingback: Joe Biden, Andrew Cuomo, and the Catholic Church

  • Pingback: Why The Christian Left is wrong

  • Pingback: A Catholic's viewpoint on Pope Francis and abortion | Live Action News

  • Pingback: What kind of an example do the pro-choice religious set?

  • Pingback: What Kind of An Example Do The Pro-Choice Religious Set?

  • Pingback: What about those who are pro-choice and religious? | Live Action News

  • Pingback: Discussing the Distortion of Supporting Abortion as Christians