I've always been amazed at Christians who claim that the Bible is why they are against abortion.
Even leaving out all the God-ordered genocides which specifically include children, there is a Bible passage that describes a procedure by which priests can cause a miscarriage (an abortion) in a cheating wife, in Numbers chapter 5. We know from other Jewish traditions and writings that a child was not considered "a human being" until they had drawn their first breath, and there is no reason to even suspect that the Old Testament authors had any different view of the undead unborn. (Sorry for the little joke, but I've always found "unborn" to be as silly a term as "undead".) If Christians have social reasons why they think that all lives are sacred, even those of the fetus, then they should acknowledge that it is a social construct, not a Biblical doctrine. Indeed, for all their "life is sacred" rhetoric in the anti-abortion campaigns, many have noted the contempt the fundamentalists seem to feel for the born, when it comes time to oppose the death penalty or prevent deaths of children by disease and starvation.
I will give the Catholics credit in that one regard; they are the only ones who seem to have a consistent theology of opposition to all death, in the above categories. Catholic organizations have quietly been fighting against the death penalty, nuclear weapons, and "okay you've been born to a poor mother, so good luck with the food thing!" attitudes of the average Christian for years. But even then, the Catholic obsession with keeping women in their place as breeders has spilled over into some anti-life positions, such as Mother Teresa's orders that prevented the Catholic charities in India from working/cooperating with or supporting other charities which distributed condoms to the women forced into sex slavery and prostitution in that country, even in areas being ravaged by HIV/AIDS. As always, it seems, the Christian theology comes ahead of a genuine respect for human dignity.
Even leaving out all the God-ordered genocides which specifically include children, there is a Bible passage that describes a procedure by which priests can cause a miscarriage (an abortion) in a cheating wife, in Numbers chapter 5. We know from other Jewish traditions and writings that a child was not considered "a human being" until they had drawn their first breath, and there is no reason to even suspect that the Old Testament authors had any different view of the undead unborn. (Sorry for the little joke, but I've always found "unborn" to be as silly a term as "undead".) If Christians have social reasons why they think that all lives are sacred, even those of the fetus, then they should acknowledge that it is a social construct, not a Biblical doctrine. Indeed, for all their "life is sacred" rhetoric in the anti-abortion campaigns, many have noted the contempt the fundamentalists seem to feel for the born, when it comes time to oppose the death penalty or prevent deaths of children by disease and starvation.
I will give the Catholics credit in that one regard; they are the only ones who seem to have a consistent theology of opposition to all death, in the above categories. Catholic organizations have quietly been fighting against the death penalty, nuclear weapons, and "okay you've been born to a poor mother, so good luck with the food thing!" attitudes of the average Christian for years. But even then, the Catholic obsession with keeping women in their place as breeders has spilled over into some anti-life positions, such as Mother Teresa's orders that prevented the Catholic charities in India from working/cooperating with or supporting other charities which distributed condoms to the women forced into sex slavery and prostitution in that country, even in areas being ravaged by HIV/AIDS. As always, it seems, the Christian theology comes ahead of a genuine respect for human dignity.
A Christian told me: if you were saved you cant lose your salvation. you're sealed with the Holy Ghost
I replied: Can I refuse? Because I find the entire concept of vicarious blood sacrifice atonement to be morally abhorrent, the concept of holding flawed creatures permanently accountable for social misbehaviors and thought crimes to be morally abhorrent, and the concept of calling something "free" when it comes with the strings of subjugation and obedience perhaps the most morally abhorrent of all... and that's without even going into the history of justifying genocide, slavery, rape, misogyny, religious intolerance, and suppression of free speech which has been attributed by your own scriptures to your deity. I want a refund. I would burn happily rather than serve the monster you profess to love.
I replied: Can I refuse? Because I find the entire concept of vicarious blood sacrifice atonement to be morally abhorrent, the concept of holding flawed creatures permanently accountable for social misbehaviors and thought crimes to be morally abhorrent, and the concept of calling something "free" when it comes with the strings of subjugation and obedience perhaps the most morally abhorrent of all... and that's without even going into the history of justifying genocide, slavery, rape, misogyny, religious intolerance, and suppression of free speech which has been attributed by your own scriptures to your deity. I want a refund. I would burn happily rather than serve the monster you profess to love.
