Re: Christian faith and Abortion: "Render Unto Caesar..."

I don't think these arguments are thoroughly thought out. In particular, consideration only of extreme examples doesn't give a very realistic picture.

> ED: That's O.K., but can you reconcile the fact that though many people
> in the U.S. want abortion to be criminalized, many also want it to remain
> legal? Jesus said, "Render unto Ceaser what is Ceaser's, and render unto
> God what is God." Maybe there's room in the world of "Ceaser" to keep
> abortions legal for those who believe in them, and room for Christians to
> be anti-abortion, to not have one, it's their choice.

Caesar demanded some things that were not his, so the render unto God clause places many limits on government. It does not spell out how to deal with the modern situation in which government policy can be influenced by the citizens.

From other posts, I think you would not agree with the suggestion that there should be room to keep slavery legal for those who believe in keeping slaves, or room to keep genocide legal for people who believe in Nazism. Not that abortion is equivalent to slavery or Nazism, but that I doubt that you really endorse total libertarianism.

>(That being said, I've seen figures that many Catholic and Evangelical women have abortions every day.) <

Of course they don't. It takes a while to get pregnant again.

Seriously, without more detail it's hard to say what the significance of that statistic might be. How does one determine how many people have abortions and what their theological beliefs might be? How many of them are purely nominal, claiming to belong to a particular faith but not taking it seriously? How many feel that this is wrong but the least evil way to deal with a bad situation? How many actually think that it's OK for themselves but not for anyone else? I suspect that the last category is quite small.

> Also, if abortion is so important, why isn't it highlighted in Jesus' teachings? <

Obviously, it's not the most important issue. It is currently much more of an issue than it was in first-century Palestine (though not totally unknown in the ancient world, as the Hippocratic Oath mentions abortions among the things that a doctor swears not to do).

> religious self-righteous hypocrites (the latter of which would seem to include anti-abortion protestors).<

An enumeration of the women harmed or killed by botched legal abortions won't give a nice picture of abortion supporters, especially if it is represented as normative. However, many anti-abortion activities take the form of providing services to women with unexpected pregnancies; in my experience, this is much more prevalent than attacks on clinics, etc.

> Moreover, Check out God's priorities in the N.T., doesn't seem to be anti-abortion at all:<

I think you mean OT, as all the examples you cite are from the OT.

Human sacrifice, especially of children, is repeatedly labeled as despicable, and the penalties for murder in the OT are generally stricter than in contemporary cultures, so the chosen examples are not fully representative.
  
> According to the Bible, God is ready, willing and able to abort fetuses:
Several of the cited passage do not clearly refer to abortion, but to a non-specific failure of progeny (could be infertility, death before marriage, etc.)

"Willing" is a problematic term. Cf. Ezekiel 33:11. God does not enjoy bringing judgement; however, it is part of His plan. Thus, there are different senses of willing.

> The Bible never really provides a logical rationale as to why fetuses, babies, and children must be punished for the sins of their parents and others.<

In fact, the Bible declares that they must not be punished for the sins of others. However, sin is not merely a private affair-it harms others as well (part of why it doesn't work theologically to say that abortion is OK for you but not for me, regardless of the political solution). Thus, the destructive choices of the parents have consequences for the children. Also, children often turn out like the parents in character, so continued rebellion on the part of children is matched by continued judgement. In some cases, the destructive choices of the parents are such that it would be better for the children not to be born (cf. Jeremiah's celibacy). Hosea 9 is a warning to Israel that their sins are bringing judgement. In context, the appeal for miscarriage is that it would be better for the child not to be born than to experience the judgement.

Another factor is the collective identity common in other societies. In our individualistic culture, it's hard to appreciate the view that people represent part of a collective whole. The extermination of Canaanites, etc. in part reflects this attitude, though the option was available to become an Israelite and thus escape destruction (Rahab, Gibeonites). On the other hand, Israelites incurred the same penalty of destruction if they identified themselves with foreign gods (Achan, idolatry, etc.), so this is quite different from the inherent ethnic superiority claims that are typical of modern genocide.

> According to the Bible, God gave orders to kill children and to rip open the bodies of pregnant women.<

Not quite; ripping open was in description of what the invaders will do, not in the commands of what to do. It also illustrates the difficulty of labeling any particular side in historical events as righteous. Although slavery is an evil, the Union army's total war tactics in the U. S. Civil War presaged the same generals' genocidal attacks on the Plains Indians, which included ripping open pregant women.

>Imagine how such acts would have stained the reputation of the devil!<

An examination of his reputation would be in order before making a comparison.

> Abortion as such is not discussed in the Bible, so any explanation of why it is not legislated or commented on is speculative.<

True, yet your post is full of such speculation. Not all speculation is equally tenuous (on either side of the issue); but as a blanket statement it has problems.
  
> 1) THE SOULS OF ALL ABORTED FETUSES GO TO HEAVEN<

I don't think anyone advocates killing people as soon as they express belief in Christianity to make sure they don't change their mind. The conclusion that abortion is OK similarly does not follow from this premise.

> Despite the misinformation campaign led by the far right, who claim that
> the United Nations Population Fund supports forced abortions, the truth is
> that by denying family planning services to those who need them, we are
> setting in motion 800,000 more abortions than would normally occur. <

The second claim doesn't answer the first accusation. Does the population fund support forced abortions? I don't know; I do know that forced abortion was a population control practice used in China, and indiscriminate support of all population control measures would include support for that. Family planning services can be helpful, though there is also a risk of promoting careless promiscuity if people (especially males) think that birth control measures free them from responsibility. Handing out condoms may convey the message "Go for it!"; teaching their proper use in the context of the general dangers of sexually transmitted diseases may be effective in improving the situation.

> QUIZ FOR PRO-LIFERS
> Question #1: Do abortionists or nature kill more people from conception
> to birth?

Nature kills more people after birth too, but that does not justify murdering people after they're born.
  
> Question #2: What percentage of abortions are performed on Evangelical
> Protestant women?

How does this compare to the percentage of women who identify themselves as evangelical protestants? What was the sample size? How reliable are the identifications? (e.g., some might not admit to being evangelical protestants; some might be trying to discredit evangelical protestants)
  
> Question #3: If the Christian Right is willing to send millions of women
> to jail for “conspiracy to murder,” how will they prevent the financial
> crisis and social chaos that their actions will inflict upon society?

Not sure who all might be included in this "Christian Right". Although abortion providers clearly have the medical knowledge to inform their decisions and the time to consider its ethics, the average woman having an abortion probably has neither information about possible risks and benefits of various options nor opportunity to think through what to do. It's also likely that a ban on abortions would decrease the number of abortions, such that the "millions" estimate may be incorrect.

> LET’S WORK ON IMPROVING THE LIVES OF THE CHILDREN WHO HAVE ALREADY BEEN BORN <

Many abortion opponents are actively seeking to do that. Not all abortion advocates are (though certainly not all aren't).

    Dr. David Campbell
    Old Seashells
    University of Alabama
    Biodiversity & Systematics
    Dept. Biological Sciences
    Box 870345
    Tuscaloosa, AL 35487-0345 USA
    bivalve@mail.davidson.alumlink.com

That is Uncle Joe, taken in the masonic regalia of a Grand Exalted Periwinkle of the Mystic Order of Whelks-P.G. Wodehouse, Romance at Droitgate Spa
Received on Mon, 11 Oct 2004 19:45:05 -0400