Who thinks being "Anti- Abortion" is strictly a religious issue?

Question

Do you think being anti abortion is confined to a belief in a God? If not, what is your view? If so, on what basis?
Thanks for any answers in advance.

Answer 1

I'm anti-abortion, but I have had the opportunity twice to do it and no one would have blamed me, in fact my doctor pushed the topic.

Once I was raped, I now have a beautiful 12 year old, and the other time my baby was way too big for my body and I almost died, it was a struggle, and I did slip away for awhile but I'm alive and kicking. I love my kids all of them.

We're all happy and alive.

For me it wasn't only a religious choice, they were my children.... even if I was raped, it wasn't her fault, it makes her all mine and I don't have to share her with anyone other than God.

Answer 2

This is not strictly a religious question or an ethical question. It can also be viewed as an economic question. When we look at over one million abortions a year being performed during the years 1979-1994, we look at the loss of sixteen MILLION Americans who were never allowed to live. Considering that right now in 2007, we would have eleven million of these aborted persons of voting age, of working age, and of taxpaying age, one can conclude that this is a hole in the future workforce that cannot be replaced.

We will see the results of the shortsightedness of the Roe v. Wade decision in the very near future, when the "baby boomers" retire and there are not NEARLY enough workers in Gen-X and Gen-Y to support their Social Security payments. We are already seeing the hole in the workforce with the replacement by illegal immigrants of those who were aborted.

This is by no means solely a religious issue.

Answer 3

The vast majority of pro-lifers base their arguments on the romantic premise that a blastocyst/embryo is a human being, and that usually comes from their beliefs about a "soul" entering somehow at the moment of conception.

So yes, it tends (at least) to be the more religious who oppose the woman's right to choose. An additional reason is that it seems the more religious one is, the less scientifically-informed they are (or want to be), so that opens the door for all kinds of misconceptions about early pregnancy, etc. Alarms should go off the moment you hear someone refer to an embryo as a "baby" in an argument (funny thing is, chances are if they saw a picture of an embryo at the two-month mark (which is the point before which the vast majority of abortions are performed; after that point abortions are done more for the sake of the woman's health than for any other reason), magnified enough that they could make it out, they very likely wouldn't even be able to identify what they're looking at.

Answer 4

Hello,

For the most part, yes since main stream religions have come up with the definition that a fetus is a human being in development and life itself begins at conception. Destroying a fetus is interfering in God's plan for a human. Without this particular point of view, removal of a fetus is no more worse than removal of a wart or cyst.

There is one issue outside of the religious one which is you cannot have the cake and eat it too. For example, if the fetus is legally not a human as ruled in court, then why are people still being charged with homicide in some states if the fetus dies due to assault or drunk driving? Furthermore women's groups are upset that some Asian women who prefer sons to daughters are going for ultra sounds and aborting the babies if they are girls. They want ultra sounds banned but is it not the Asian woman's body and her decision? These women's groups fought so hard for this but want to back track now that the logic is boomeranging back in their faces.

Cheers,

Michael Kelly

Answer 5

Obviously not.

I'm an atheist, and I have to say, I'm very conflicted about "The Abortion Issue." I do find myself doing a kneejerk liberal thing sometimes in response to the hard-core Christian Rightie "Pro-Life" position. They've lost touch with the reality and nuance of the issue, and have adopted a formalized, black-and-white, dogmatic mentality about abortion. Nothing in life is that simple and cut-and-dried. The fact that we now have the Supreme Court agreeing on laws that make NO exception for the life of the mother is symptomatic of this. People need to consider what "valuing life" really means.

The idea of abortion is as appalling to me as it is to anybody. Nobody is "pro-abortion." Nobody wants it to happen. The only people who think any differently are people who read too much Ann Coulter.

I suppose ultimately I take a pragmatic approach. As long as women get pregnant, we'll never get rid of abortion. All we do by criminalizing it is to drive it underground; and anyway, the wealthy will always have access. If one of the Bush twins, e.g., found herself in an awkward position, she'd be flown out of the country nice and quiet-like and nobody would ever hear anything about it. So even though I can't agree with abortion on an abstract moral level, I don't think criminalizing it is the answer. You're only placing obviously desperate women in an even more desperate situation.

Answer 6

Following the Savior's loss of existence and those of His Apostles, doctrines and ordinances have been replaced, and apostasy set in lower back. This time religious darkness lasted for hundreds of years earlier rays of sunshine could as quickly as greater penetrate the earth. The Apostle Peter knew of this Apostasy and prophesied following the Savior's Ascension that the Lord does no longer return for His 2nd Coming until there replaced right into a "restitution of all issues" (see Acts 3:19-21). The Apostle Paul additionally prophesied of a time while the individuals could "no longer undergo sound doctrine" (2 Timothy 4:3-4) and that a "falling away" (2 Thessalonians 2:2-3) could precede the 2nd Coming of Christ. He, too, stated the "restitution of all issues," asserting that the Savior "contained in the dispensation of the fulness of cases . . . could assemble at the same time in one all issues in Christ" (Ephesians a million:10). real faith could be discovered by evaluating it to while Christ walked the earth and set up the church in his way. All different stuff is extra or deleted by guy. it particularly is comprised if having Apostles, Prophets, Priesthood, Temples, Revelation, each and all the presents of the spirit, expertise of the Atonement, baptism by immersion, bestowing the present of the Holy Ghost, and greater than a number of different different such issues.

Answer 7

Abortion is a cultural, political, and moral issue. As such, it tends to polarize.

As for my own views on it, I agree with the Catholic Church (I'm also against the death penalty and euthanasia, on the same basis). But I do recognize that many do not share my position. It is very much a matter of conscience, and therefore deeply personal, while also impacting society as a whole.

Answer 8

Can't be. Non-religious people have very strong views on the issue.

I can easily see an athiest argument that since this life is all we have, ending a life is a horrible thing. Actually, that would be more horrible than people who think aborted fetuses end up in heaven.

Answer 9

I don't think it's strictly confined to belief in the Christian god, but it *is* a religious-freedom issue. The existence of a soul, for example, is a religious concept, and many who oppose abortion do so on the basis of having a "soul", even if they're not Christian. I am agnostic and I don't know if souls exist, so I consider any legislation based on "ensoulment" to be an infringement on my religious freedom.

Answer 10

Being against abortion has nothing to do with religion, alot of religious people are anti-abortion but that's not the case. it's based on moral values and principles.