Should Christians support a platform that keeps abortion on demand abortion choice?

[JonC]

I got none of that from your response:

'But I meant on a national scale. Wouldn't such a party only serve to take away the Christian vote from the GOP and help the DNC?'

It must of went right over my head.

That was an entirely different conversation.

@KenH had given me a link to the American Solidarity Party, which is anti-abortion (I don't know where they stand on immorality).

The GOP has gained Christian support in the past, largely over abortion.

So I was wondering if the Solidarity Party would help the DNC by giving Christian voters a choice better than the GOP.

In the end all political parties are "worldly powers".

We cannot legislate morality. It would be wrong to have a Christian government sticking faithfully to Christian morals in policy governing a mostly unchristian population (it would be oppression). That is not what we are called to do.

If the majority of the United States is non-Christian (to include "nominal Christians") then our government will be primarily non-Christian by design.

 

[JonC]

So it shouldn't matter if another party takes votes away from the GOP.

It doesn't matter, unless one is a Republican.

My point is if you have a third party that appeals more to Christians than the GOP, the GOP could become their 2nd choice, giving an advantage to the DNC.

I was making an observation. Not saying it matters.

 

[KenH]

@KenH had given me a link to the American Solidarity Party, which is anti-abortion (I don't know where they stand on immorality).

The start of their platform plank on "Marriage and Family":

The American Solidarity Party believes that the natural family, founded on the marriage of one man and one woman, is the fundamental unit and basis of every human society. Family breakdown is a key contributor to widespread social problems in this country. In order to promote stable families, it is in the interest of the state to support marriage recognized as the exclusive union of one man and one woman for life. At the same time, we recognize that the state must support the needs of all people—especially children, as well as the elderly and disabled—regardless of household structure.

 

[DaveXR650]

But to be fair, neither side will decrease the number of abortions.

That argument was used by some people close to me back when Obama ran based on the fact that they felt they were voting against their best interests in other areas and wasting a vote that due to Roe V Wade, would not save one unborn life.

But the Republicans have not indicated that they would oppose efforts in states where it is doable - to restrict abortions. Indeed that would save some preborn babies. The Democrats have clearly stated that they would. That is a real, concrete difference.
And it will make a difference in the amount of abortions performed over the next years.

Another thing to keep in mind is that there will be great differences in the regulatory areas and in the areas of funding. In many states, abortion was almost gone before Roe was simply because of certification and licensing and funding issues. Remember, the Democrats not only want a woman to have some kind of "right" to an abortion, but they believe they have a right to make you pay for it, promote it and support it. The "no real difference" argument is a non argument this year.

 

[Scarlett O.]

And it will make a difference in the amount of abortions performed over the next years.

That may or may not be true. In my state of Louisiana, women can still get abortions, just not here.....but the state of Illinois flies down here and picks them up, flies them back to Illinois and they get abortions there.

 

[DaveXR650]

That may or may not be true. In my state of Louisiana, women can still get abortions, just not here.....but the state of Illinois flies down here and picks them up, flies them back to Illinois and they get abortions there.

Yes. It gets complicated. Because of the nature of this whole situation many of the women are really torn as to what to do. Little things make a difference. That's why having a pro life clinic nearby and not having a well funded infrastructure supporting the abortion industry makes a difference. That's why so many of those contemplating an abortion change their mind if they get to see a sonogram of the baby. But you are right. People were driving to other states to get abortions even back in the '70's, at their own expense.

 

[Mikoo]

That was an entirely different conversation.

@KenH had given me a link to the American Solidarity Party, which is anti-abortion (I don't know where they stand on immorality).

The GOP has gained Christian support in the past, largely over abortion.

So I was wondering if the Solidarity Party would help the DNC by giving Christian voters a choice better than the GOP.

In the end all political parties are "worldly powers".

We cannot legislate morality. It would be wrong to have a Christian government sticking faithfully to Christian morals in policy governing a mostly unchristian population (it would be oppression). That is not what we are called to do.

If the majority of the United States is non-Christian (to include "nominal Christians") then our government will be primarily non-Christian by design.

And...your point of all this...is???

 

[Mikoo]

Yes, I stated my view on another thread, and in the OP here as well.

K

The purpose of this thread is to discuss whether a Christian should support a platform that presents abortion as a choice.

K

It matters to me because I am a Christian. It provides insight into the convictions of Christians as well as the compromises Christians are willing to make.

So as a Christian, what will you do with this insight?

As it stands it seems that Christians are willing to support abortion as a choice when in the past a pro-life stance was very important to most believers.

K

It demonstrates abortion becoming accepted as a normal element of culture, and that culture influencing professing Christians.

And...now what?

 

[JonC]

The start of their platform plank on "Marriage and Family":

The American Solidarity Party believes that the natural family, founded on the marriage of one man and one woman, is the fundamental unit and basis of every human society. Family breakdown is a key contributor to widespread social problems in this country. In order to promote stable families, it is in the interest of the state to support marriage recognized as the exclusive union of one man and one woman for life. At the same time, we recognize that the state must support the needs of all people—especially children, as well as the elderly and disabled—regardless of household structure.

While I agree that the breakdown of the family has contributed to social problems, but I think that to address the issue one must go deeper. Addressing the family unit through legislation will not solve the problem (the breakdown of the family unit was politically caused by the DNC decades ago, but the problem goes even deeper).

The problem with this party is our government is designed to represent the people governed.

I do not understand how a candidate for the American Solidarity Party could represent Americans as 69% of Americans are against laws restricting most abortions. Also, 7% of US citizens identify as LGBQ. BUT 70% of US citizens support SSM.

What would it look like to have a Christian secular government?

It would be a "Christian" oligarchy. That is not the calling of a Christian.

 

[JonC]

And...your point of all this...is???

?? The point of having a discussion with @KenH ? I like Ken. I disagree with him, but I like discussing things with him.

What is your point in all this?

 

[JonC]

. . . So as a Christian, what will you do with this insight? . . . And...now what?

What I will do with this insight is warn Christians not to become compromised, not to lose their "First Love", not to put their hands to the plow and look back to the concerns of this world lest those concerns choak out that gospel which began in their lives.

As far as abortion goes, now we should stand apart from those platforms supporting abortion as choice to be salt and light, engage individuals seeking abortion, show then alternatives, share the gospel. Believe it or not, these abortion clinics only e ist because there is a demand for abortions.

 

[JonC]

That argument was used by some people close to me back when Obama ran based on the fact that they felt they were voting against their best interests in other areas and wasting a vote that due to Roe V Wade, would not save one unborn life.

But the Republicans have not indicated that they would oppose efforts in states where it is doable - to restrict abortions. Indeed that would save some preborn babies. The Democrats have clearly stated that they would. That is a real, concrete difference.
And it will make a difference in the amount of abortions performed over the next years.

Another thing to keep in mind is that there will be great differences in the regulatory areas and in the areas of funding. In many states, abortion was almost gone before Roe was simply because of certification and licensing and funding issues. Remember, the Democrats not only want a woman to have some kind of "right" to an abortion, but they believe they have a right to make you pay for it, promote it and support it. The "no real difference" argument is a non argument this year.

The GOP has indicated that they would leave it to the states. And unlike the DNC the GOP does not consider abortion a right.

The GOP has also moved away from being anti-abortion. Most seem more comfortable with early abortions.

So if the GOP wins then getting an abortion would be less convenient (just as avaliable, but some would have to travel out of state).

I agree the GOP is the "lesser evil" on abortion and alternate lifestyles. But they are not a platform that excludes those evils.

 

[Mikoo]

What I will do with this insight is warn Christians not to become compromised, not to lose their "First Love", not to put their hands to the plow and look back to the concerns of this world lest those concerns choak out that gospel which began in their lives.

As far as abortion goes, now we should stand apart from those platforms supporting abortion as choice to be salt and light, engage individuals seeking abortion, show then alternatives, share the gospel. Believe it or not, these abortion clinics only e ist because there is a demand for abortions.

I agree.

 

[Mikoo]

?? The point of having a discussion with @KenH ? I like Ken. I disagree with him, but I like discussing things with him.

What is your point in all this?

My point is to see what your point is. You answered in your response #31.

 

[KenH]

I like Ken.

 

[JonC]

That is EXACTLY how I picture you. I'm the Barney to your Andy.

 

[Silverhair]

I agree that the GOP has a less evil platform, but I worry that it is more dangerous to churches (the DNC, obviously, is more dangerous to our nation).

I understanding trying to keep the DNC from making the issue worse. But to be fair, neither side will decrease the number of abortions.

I just cannot bring myself to support the GOP because that would be supporting the GOP platform. I agree with their economic and immigration policies, and I appreciate a move away from "big government".

But I'd be supporting a pro-abortion policy and pro-LGBT normalization policy by supporting the GOP (a less encompassing policy than the DNC, but those evils nonetheless).

I just can't.

And that is your choice but why do you demonize those that choose to cast a vote for the lesser evil as you call it. If Christians always used the all or nothing approach in their decision re voting then they would never vote as there are always issues that as a Christian we do not accept.

I do not agree with some of the CPC policies but I have seen what the Liberals have done and want to do so I will as the saying goes Hold my nose and vote for the CPC when the times comes. Just as I believe many Christians in the US will do when they cast a vote for which ever party they choose.

 

[KenH]

Hold my nose and vote for the CPC

What is the CPC?

 

[JonC]

And that is your choice but why do you demonize those that choose to cast a vote for the lesser evil as you call it. If Christians always used the all or nothing approach in their decision re voting then they would never vote as there are always issues that as a Christian we do not accept.

I do not agree with some of the CPC policies but I have seen what the Liberals have done and want to do so I will as the saying goes Hold my nose and vote for the CPC when the times comes. Just as I believe many Christians in the US will do when they cast a vote for which ever party they choose.

For the same reason you "demonize" Christians who cannot support evil (even that "lesser evil") by voting.

I get that we won't agree with all policies ina platform. I'm just surprised at some of the compromises you are willing to make....but that is probably because the moral issues you are willing to compromise were the reason I voted in the first place.

Many in the US will. Most, in fact, will. They will hold their one knowing that they are voting to enact evil in order to get the things they believe will help the nation.

But I believe we are accountable for our actions and our voice. So I can't.

I don't subscribe to utilitarianism. I believe acts hold a moral value.

That old going back in time to murder Hitler when he was a child.....my answer is "no", because I believe that murdering a child is wrong. Your answer would be "yes" because it would save lives.

 

[Silverhair]

What is the CPC?

Conservative Party of Canada