About Abortion

Right & Wrong
User avatar
TheEditor
Posts: 814
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2010 9:09 pm

Re: About Abortion

Post by TheEditor » Sat Apr 09, 2016 11:58 am

First, a woman's body is not her property. Nor is a man's body his property. She and he have not created nor purchased their bodies, and they are therefore not natural owners.
This is precisely why none of the Libertarian or quasi-Libertarian arguments about morality and etc. have any resonance with me. All of them require an "equal transaction" paradigm. No such paradigm exists for the Christian. God ultimately owns us and everything else. This is why "pray for your enemies"; "give without expecting a return", etc. etc. are "hard sayings" for some people within Christendom. Much of what Christ teaches us lends itself to our "going away grieved". -- Matt. 19:22

Regards, Brenden.
[color=#0000FF][b]"It was for freedom that Christ set us free; therefore keep standing firm and do not be subject again to a yoke of slavery."[/b][/color]

User avatar
psimmond
Posts: 438
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2010 7:31 pm
Location: Sharpsburg, GA
Contact:

Re: About Abortion

Post by psimmond » Sat Apr 09, 2016 2:48 pm

Can we go too far with this analogy of God owning our bodies? After all, the Bible often refers to our bodies as our bodies.

I think if we take the ownership in a literal way, we might run into problems. For example, If God's body that we inhabit loses its vision, should we seek medical care? If God's body that we inhabit feels hungry, should we automatically assume God wants us to feed it rather than fast it? The list could go on and on.
Let me boldly state the obvious. If you are not sure whether you heard directly from God, you didn’t.
~Garry Friesen

User avatar
steve
Posts: 3392
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 9:45 pm

Re: About Abortion

Post by steve » Sat Apr 09, 2016 2:56 pm

Hi psimmond,

I do not understand your argument. When Paul says that we are bought with a price and not our own, he is specifically referring to the need to glorify God in every aspect of behavior and management of our (His) bodies. When I rented an apartment, I often invited people to come over to "my" apartment, but this was not denying the fact that someone else owned it, and that I was not at liberty to abuse it. I was still responsible for cleaning the windows and carpets. How is this analogy challenged by your examples?

User avatar
Homer
Posts: 2995
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 11:08 pm

Re: About Abortion

Post by Homer » Sat Apr 09, 2016 4:36 pm

Hi Steve,

You wrote:
I do not understand your argument. When Paul says that we are bought with a price and not our own, he is specifically referring to the need to glorify God in every aspect of behavior and management of our (His) bodies.
Isn't the "bought with a price" limited in application to Christians? I take it as a reference to Christ's sacrifice; perhaps I am in error.

Homer

User avatar
steve
Posts: 3392
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 9:45 pm

Re: About Abortion

Post by steve » Sat Apr 09, 2016 6:11 pm

I agree that it is a reference to Christ's atoning death, and that Paul is writing to Christians based upon their recognition of this reality. However:

1) I think we both believe that the atonement of Christ is intended to cover the sins of the whole world (2 Pet.2:1; 1 Tim.2:6; 2 Cor.5:19; Hebrews 2:9);

2) All people are nonetheless owned by God, by virtue of creation (Psalm 24:1; 100:3).

3) I think, also, that the ethics we adopt for ourselves with reference to our acknowledgement of God's ownership would be consistent with the ethics we would approve for those who do not yet acknowledge God's ownership of themselves, but who live in the delusion of self-ownership.

User avatar
psimmond
Posts: 438
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2010 7:31 pm
Location: Sharpsburg, GA
Contact:

Re: About Abortion

Post by psimmond » Sat Apr 09, 2016 8:52 pm

Hi Steve,
You said, "The question of his or her continued presence in the woman's body is a matter for the Owner, not the first tenant, to decide." If a tenant can't decide whether or not to remove something in God's body that they are possessing, how can a tenant know whether or not to seek medical care if God's body loses its vision? Or if God's body that we inhabit feels hungry, should we automatically assume God wants us to feed it rather than fast it?

My point in my last 2 comments was that private ownership still exists even though God created the universe and everything in it; this is clear from the laws given to Moses.

Finally, if you believe humans (or even just Christians) don't own anything, including our bodies, then would you also say we don't own our thoughts or beliefs?
Let me boldly state the obvious. If you are not sure whether you heard directly from God, you didn’t.
~Garry Friesen

User avatar
Homer
Posts: 2995
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 11:08 pm

Re: About Abortion

Post by Homer » Sat Apr 09, 2016 10:24 pm

But if we are stewards of God's property then what should we do? All sorts of questions arise, as in should we artificially keep ourselves alive?

User avatar
steve
Posts: 3392
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 9:45 pm

Re: About Abortion

Post by steve » Sun Apr 10, 2016 12:02 am

Are these questions really difficult?

User avatar
psimmond
Posts: 438
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2010 7:31 pm
Location: Sharpsburg, GA
Contact:

Re: About Abortion

Post by psimmond » Sun Apr 10, 2016 7:43 am

Do we need permission from the owner to remove a tumor?
Let me boldly state the obvious. If you are not sure whether you heard directly from God, you didn’t.
~Garry Friesen

Singalphile
Posts: 903
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2012 12:46 pm

Re: About Abortion

Post by Singalphile » Sun Apr 10, 2016 1:25 pm

An unborn human has not committed any crime, unlike an adult human who has committed the crime of trespassing. The mother is responsible for the life of the fetus, but the mother does not own the fetus and the fetus is not simply a part of "her own body" any more than an infant is. If it were possible to move a human from one mother to another (which I suppose it may eventually be), then that would be one thing. But it isn't and so this "eviction" is really just killing, as has been noted. I also fail to see any difference between killing (or allowing to die from neglect) an unborn human and any other healthy, dependent child. Both can be inconvenient and unwelcome, and abandoning them to death would usually be the easiest option if one only wanted to get rid of them. Both are also innocent.

Obviously, from a Christian perspective, parents are morally responsible for taking care of their own relatives and household (1 Tim 5:8).
... that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. John 5:23

Post Reply

Return to “Ethics”