How would you answer these statements:

Here are five pro-choice arguments made by Christians [link]:

1. Life is complicated and hard
2. The Christian faith should not be exclusively about rules:
3. Legal abortion limits dangers to women:
4. Abortion is a personal decision that cannot be summed up in soundbites:
5. The Holy Spirit gives the Christian the ability to make choices, and those choices are only accountable to God, not human authority:

 

As a reminder:

Baptist Board Posting Rules & Guidelines
2 …In addition, topics and/or posts that seek to promote clearly unscriptural and controversial social and moral positions, such as abortion, are prohibited as well. The official position of The Baptist Board is that life begins at conception. Opinions, stated as fact, that would contradict the board's position on this issue will be edited or deleted entirely…​

I am pro-life, so all of my comments need to be understood with that in mind. In the past, some less than thoughtful posters have jumped to false conclusions and made false charges against me. I must also point out that a moderator started this discussion (as well as the last one that went poorly), so I am not pushing an agenda.

As usual, Newsmax does a poor job representing views they don't like. Christians are required to properly and fairly represent the viewpoints of those with whom we disagree, to the best of our ability. It is part of loving our neighbors.

Yes. We always need to keep this in mind.

The Christian faith is not about rules, it is about being conformed to the Person and nature of Christ, being empowered by His grace. The commands of Jesus exist to align ourselves in conformity to Him and His empowerment.

It does. The question of concern surrounds whether or not the conceived life is a person at the various stages of development within the womb. This is both more complex than most anti-abortion people believe, and less complex than most pro-choice people believe.

Abortion is obviously a personal choice (involving the intimate parts of a person and their well-being) as well as a corporate choice. Beyond the conceived life, there is also at least one other parent whom the choice will affect. Then there may be communal concerns regarding having children to provide the next generation.

This is a dumb statement. We are accountable both to God and human governments.

 

"3. Legal abortion limits anger to women." This is a misleading statement. The dangers to the child in the womb are incalculably increased, infinitely greater than any danger to the mother, with abortion. There is no comparison. It is a totally illogical statement.

 

You make a good point, since you consider the conceived life a person ("the child"). However, if one was to consider the woman's situation unrelated to the conceived life, then it is obviously true that "legal abortion limits danger to women."

 

It is impossible to call them unrelated.

 

That's a fair critique. I am trying to use neutral language (so as to be fair to all points of view) and I made a poor word choice. Certainly the needs of the conceived life and the woman are connected with each other, but if one does not consider the needs of the conceived life relevant to the choice of abortion, then it is certainly true that "legal abortion limits danger to women."

Is that better? (Please note my initial comments regarding my own convictions regarding this issue.)

 

True. But the needs of the conceived life are intricately entwined with the life of the mother. So, it is not a valid way to look at it. I am not trying to be a devil's advocate. I am trying to show that it is illogical to separate the life of the child in the womb from the decision to abort, not matter what the danger to the mother.

 

The arguments hold as much water as a 5 gallon pail missing a bottom.

1. When life is complicated and hard, I might need to kill my children.
-Wait, wait, I thought women are "tough" and "strong" now. Isn't this claiming that women are weak and can't handle adversity or pressure? Hmmm

2. The Christian faith isn't about rules
-What a well thought out argument. I'm glad there's no rules. Let's all go sin so that grace abounds. Being a progressive Christian I never read the Bible, yet I'm sure there's no verse about that anywhere by that evil Patriarchalist Paul. Gosh I hate reading Paul's Epistles. It makes me feel guilty and that's sooooo not tolerant.

3. Abortion limits might danger women
-Ooooh, the "dangers" women faced before abortion. Someone play some scary music! Women might actually be responsible for choices they make?! Oh heavens no! So scary, oooooh. Again, aren't women nowadays super women boss babes? They're supposed to be tough and resilient. I'm so confused. Are women able to handle adversity or not. What is a woman?


4. Killing children can't be summed up in a sound byte.
God would like to disagree with you: "Thou Shalt Not Murder"


5. I have the Holy Spirit (Not if you're killing children you don't) and the government doesn't get to tell people what to do.
-I vaguely recall someone saying something about salt and about Christians being salt and someone saying something about "Everything on heaven and earth is given to me therefore go into all the nations, discipling them". Oh well, I'm a progressive Christian. I can just close my eyes, go to my safe space and fix that problematic Bible verse. I know better after all. God is like, so not tolerant, errrr mah gosh.

These 5 arguments are actually 1 argument. And that argument is "It's all about me"

 

Congratulations on posting a response that will harden people in the pro-choice position and weaken any opportunity for other Christians to persuade those persons to a better way. It might make you feel better to misrepresent and demonize people you don't agree with, but that's counterproductive to the point of this thread (as I understand Salty's intent). It's not "all about you" and your desire to feel morally superior to those you don't like.

 

So, professing Christians claim it’s ok to kill babies and you think telling them they are killing babies will “harden” them in their pro baby murder stance? Really?

Don’t know about “feeling morally superior” to the pro baby murder crowd, but I do feel an enormous sadness that professing Christians are undermining the pro life message by claiming baby murder is ok.

They are giving the enemies of God great occasion to blaspheme His name.

If they are Christians then God Holy Spirit is surely grieved by these statements and beliefs and He, God, will soften their hearts and bring them to repentance.

The great damage being done is to unbelievers who see no differences between these folks and the pro baby murder non Christian crowd.

peace to you

 

Thank you. I find myself in good company with John the Baptist, Elijah, Jesus, Nehemiah, Paul, etc as I am not a prevaricator unlike many Evanjellyfish today.

No misrepresentation at all. Babies are murdered because irresponsible adults don't want to deal with the consequences of their fornication. Truth hurts. If it hurts them, then maybe next time they shouldn't kill babies.

The clear, English, title of this thread is "How would you answer these statements?". That's how I would and how I DO answer them. Don't like it? Tough nuggies. I ain't asking you to like it.

Oh no, my poor wittle fweelings. Telling people to stop murdering babies is making it all about me? Is that a real circuitous way of insinuating I'm a baby?

As for my secret desire to "feel morally superior", I must applaud your insight into my desires Nostradamus. Impeccable wisdom. To paraphrase Desdemona "I am undone!"

 

If you have talked to pro-choice Christians, you would know that most of them (FWIW, all that I have personally talked to) don’t not believe that a life in the germinal stage, the embryonic stage, and sometimes even the fetal stage are persons (aka, “babies”). Not that many years ago, a common view was that a fetus was not a person until they took their first breath.

Understanding the views of persons you don’t agree with — and treating them fairly — is the first step to changing one’s mind. Simply attacking them (like someone else in this thread) will only harden them into their position.

Having a respectful and informed conversation about the nature of life in the womb is key to having an effective dialogue. And yes, I have helped change the minds of pro-choice Christians in the past.

"Baby murder" - that’s quite a loaded term. If someone doesn’t believe an embryo or fetus is a person, then it cannot be murder. It would be “baby manslaughter” at worst.

There is no shortage of persons who claim to be Christians who are giving occasion for unbelievers to blaspheme God.

So there is no point in talking to a person with whom you disagree? Then why respond at all? Just let the Spirit take care of the opinions of others, right?

 

You flatter yourself. True prophets are only harsh toward self-righteous persons.

Sure there is. You have made the strange assumption that pro-choice Christians actually hold your view regarding the personhood of life in the womb, yet they are intentionally, and with full-knowledge, acting viciously toward that life.

You make the profoundly naive assumption that all persons who consider abortion have pregnancies resulting from fornication (voluntary sexual relations outside of marriage).

So does ignorant and intentional cruelty.

And I congratulated you for it and pointed out the consequences. What’s the problem? Why were you triggered?

Do you feel like you are “owning the libs?” Well enjoy it. You are going to be held accountable for every last word by an authority much greater than any of us. Your words work against the goal of eliminating elective abortions.

I would not make a stupid insinuation like that. I’ll tell you up front what I think and not play around. What a lot of people around here don’t realize is that I never try to insult anyone. That’s emotional claptrap. I was trying to engage your reason, not your emotions. However, it is clear that I failed since I managed to trigger an emotional response.

It was the most charitable interpretation of your answers. Otherwise, I would have to assume that you want people to continue aborting children by the way you have responded to those views. Or the third alternative, that you don’t know any better.

 

Really? The Nazi’s didn’t believe Jews, himosexuals, Gypsies and others weren’t really people either. Was it murder? Yes, of course it was.

Calling a person a “fetus” doesn’t change the fact they are a person created in God’s image. Killing them is murder.

Calling them a fetus only serves to ease the conscious of the people involved in the baby murder.

peace to you

 

- AND - ​

There seems to be disconnect between my motivations and your apparent motivations:

My motivation is to engage with the Christian who is pro-choice and get them to reconsider their position through discussion, using logic and scripture. I am unconcerned about showing virtue or saying “the right things” to stay in good standing with the “pro-life” movement, since I don’t live my life for the approval of anyone but God. I’m also not concerned about “winning” an argument or proving I am correct. My motivation is to change the mind of the other person. And the only way the other person’s mind changes is by their self-reflection and consent.

To do such a thing, we have to start where people are. Every pro-choice Christian I have even spoken to DOES NOT believe that a conceived life (including conception, implantation, and germinal stage) is a person (aka, “a baby”). Then there are some who do not recognize that a fetus is a person until the time of birth when they take their first breath (concept based on Genesis 2:7) which used to be a mainstream view among many conservative Christians until the 1970s.

Moreover, God, the law of Moses, and US law all recognize that murder is a matter of intent AND knowledge. Manslaughter is what happens when a life is taken without both knowledge and intent.

So starting out a conversation with someone by calling them a “baby murderer” effectively ends the conversation immediately. This should be common sense. However, upon reflection, I now understand that my motivations for “responding” to these poorly articulated positions (thanks, Newsmax) must be different from yours.

It seems everyone else wants to drop “truth bombs” and take no prisoners. That certainly feels good and plays well on TV and social media, but it ridiculously ineffective for changing hearts and minds.

 

There is no such thing as a "pro-choice Christian." That's an oxymoron.

 

So, to use an analogy, when professing Christians believe blacks, Jews, himosexuals, Hispanics are not really people, therefore it really isn’t sin/murder to kill them, your response/motivation is to change their minds through self reflection and consent… all the while watching the murders take place?

OK, may God bless your efforts.

OTOH, I will call the baby murderers what they are, baby murderers, and trust God Holy Spirit to convict them of the truth.

I will also point out these professing Christians are giving the enemies of God great occasion to blaspheme His name.

peace to you