doesnt abortion go against the commandment "thou shalt not kill"?

Question

keep in mind, im not talking about rape or incest, just regular abortion ...

its not a question of church and state, its a question of morals!

ok ok...my view on abortion is all abortion is wrong but if you rule out all abortion there is always the extreme arguement of incest or rape....i think abortion is very wrong....and i think that life begins at conception...i am just curious to see other's points of view...

Answer 1

I agree with you that abortions are wrong. I strongly believe that it is cruel and takes away the life of a child. Everyone should have the right to live and I believe it is selfish of someone to take away a child's entire life because they don't want 9 months of suffering. If they can't take care of the child there is always adoption. To those who say that a women should have the right to chose, what about the unborn child, shouldn't he have some rights or at the very least the right to live. Now this is also disapproved by religion as it goes against the 10 commandments as so forth but it is more then that, its a matter of love and selflessness, its morality and common sense. Abortion is murder and murder is wrong.

Answer 2

Abortion goes against many concepts the Bible teaches. In "Bible Times" there were many words to describe an unborn baby. (I have taught several children that were born at 16 weeks, so the 21 week comment is out-of date.) According to scientists, the unborn do qualify, as definition, as alive.....
Really, the commandment is about not murdering.
There are many famous and world-changing people that are the product of incest and/ or rape. The Almighty God is able to change an awful sinful act into a blessing. You would be surprised if you knew how many wonderful people were the result of this kind of situation. Murdering an innocent person is a great sin to God. Do some research in the Bible, as well as, some research on the unborn. As the mother of six children and a teacher of hundreds, I can tell you life doesn't begin at birth.

Answer 3

The issue is, is an embryo a human or potential human. This is what leads to all the problems over abortion. To pro-lifers, you're killing an unborn baby, to pro-choicers, it's not a baby. Actually, the medical community calls all miscarriages "abortions", though it's not meant in the way you are stating it.

If you're going to argue that abortion is murder, why are you disassociating rape and incest? It's either murder or it isn't. What choice did the baby have in the mother's rape or incest? None. The whole reason for keeping all of this out is political. There would be so much opposition to it, there would be practically no abortion laws period.

Answer 4

If it does, then in vitro fertilization also goes against it. Assuming that you believe a fetus is human from the moment of conception as most Christians do, then so does having a mole removed. In fact, the mole may have more human cells than a early stage fetus. I know, I know... you're gonna say, "The mole can't live on it's own!" Well, at that point, neither can the fetus.

Saying this is a question of morals... well that's true. But, it is also a question of separation of church and state because the morals are based on your religion. Others don't believe in your religion or follow your commandments, and that's the way it is.

Answer 5

Yes, abortion would go against that commandment. You do not have to be religious to realize that killing a baby would be in violation on a law that says "thou shall not kill". You may not agree with the law, but it does not change that killing a baby would be a violation of such a law. That was the question.

There is no scientific basis for arguing that a child still within the womb is not a "person". It has all the genetic material it will ever have. Before the mother normally knows that she is pregnant, the child already has a heartbeat and brain activity. Last time I checked, those were the two things used to determine if a person is "alive".

And to the person who said the Bible doesn't talk about unborn babies because it has no word for "fetus", I hope they realize that the word "fetus" comes from the Catholic Bible. It is the Latin Bible's word for "baby". Scientist like to use Latin for naming things, so they named a baby still in the womb with the Latin word "baby". They were smart enough to know that person growing insides its mother is a "baby", and named it such.

Answer 6

No.

I'll explain why some think that abortion is not taking a life.

Some counter the fetus is "alive", and use the heartbeat as evidence. It's a poor example or argument to use the heartbeat as an affirmation of "Living". Thousands of human organs are harvested each year from accident victims while their hearts are still beating and most are breathing on their own (or respirator). All have no functional brain capacity. Removal for the organs for others, will certainly result in physiologic death for the accident victim. It will result in 'Life" for the recipient of the organs, especially in the case of a heart. If we waited until the accident victim was completely dead, we would not be able to use the organs harvested. We (society) feel this process is Okay because as a society we have set the standard of "living" as functional brain capacity.

Some will argue when a sperm and egg get together and share DNA, they are a Living Cell, however, each cell was "living" also before uniting DNA. Only the obvious is proved, but what it proves is meaningless. Some try to make the point that Life starts at conception, which many do not agree. The term conception is controversial in itself. Many of the Pro-Life movement have termed conception as the moment of fertilization before implantation into the uterine wall. However, the origin of the word Conception is fro the Latin root "Capio" which means to "grasp, to take hold, or receive into the body". Until implantation occurs (between 6-7 days after fertilization), there's no way this living cell is going to survive anyways. In fact, most fertilized eggs never implant into the uterine wall. While estimates vary, science is in consensus that this natural abortion process occurs between 60-80% of the time for fertilized eggs. Call it nature or God's will, as a percentage, people cause much few abortions than God or nature.

Answer 7

The abortion issue is one of the most hotly contested debates that can be raised, ultimately each women must make her own decision. My personal view is that, "dead things don't grow", regardless of the falsely imposed legal interpretation that the child is not a person until birth, from the point of conception there is life, to extinguish life is killing.

Answer 8

Nope. Not to mention, I don't believe in the 10 commandments, so I guess I'm good.

Can't kill something that technically isn't alive or can breath on it's own (proven by doctors/science....not crazy anti-abortion campaigns).

Abortion after the first trimester can "technically" be pushing it, as the child could POSSIBLY live beyond that point. But until then, it's a FETUS, not a BABY.

That's why I'm pro-choice for first trimester abortions. I think it's okay to have it AFTER this point if you need it because:

a) the baby has died in the womb...why carry it the entire time?
b) it's a medical necessity (deadly for the mother)

Answer 9

YES!!! Abortion IS murder, and it goes under the 10 Commandments, according specifically to Exodus 20:13

Read your Bible before asking about this type of question.

Answer 10

No because until the fetus is at least 21 weeks along, it can not survive outside of the mother's womb. Even at 21 weeks, it will take a ton of money and medical intervention to help the baby have a chance of surviving outside the mother's womb. Additionally, when the Bible was written there was no terminology for a "fetus" -- that is a modern medical term. So how could you "kill" something that didn't even exist when the book was written?