nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Can a Christian vote for unlimited abortion?

J C

I don't believe that a Christian can morally vote for unlimited abortion.

The Sixth Commandment is very simple and very clear ... 'Thou shalt not kill'.

It means that you cannot kill yourself or another Human Being, except in self defence (or the defence of another Human Being) where no other option is available.
This is the basis for all laws protecting the person and criminalising the killing of other people in Common Law Jurisprudence.

Induced abortion is ethically and morally wrong ... except where the life of the mother is directly threatened and there is no other option available to save her.

This is the current law in Ireland.

Voting to expand Irish Law to allow the unlimited killing of unborn children is not something that any Christian (or other monotheist, indeed) can do in conscience and in clear contravention of the Sixth Commandment of God.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

recedite

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Just from the general tenor of the proceedings.

I can't really comment on the selection process, except to say it was a private company making the selections (which is not a great situation, for a start) and IMO anyone who was self-employed or otherwise not in a position to give up so much time, and anyone who lived far away from the venue, and anyone who was not particularly interested in the issue, would all probably have to preclude themselves from the process.

If you were going to do something like this properly, you'd have to pick a random group of citizens, give them a salary and an office in Dublin for a year or two, and have the same group deliberate on various different issues. In other words, they would basically be TD's or Senators, but randomly selected instead of being voted in.

recedite

Delirium wrote: »

Abortion carries less risk of fatality to pregnancy for the woman, so we're talking about life for both unborn and woman.

That's not saying much. Even getting out of bed in the morning entails more risk to life, than staying in bed, for both men and women.

.......

This post has been deleted.

Delirium

recedite wrote: »

No, its putting the life of the unborn above the health and convenience of the woman. And that is the whole crux of the matter. Some agree with that, some don't.

Abortion carries less risk of fatality to pregnancy for the woman, so we're talking about life for both unborn and woman. The requires the woman to take the risks that pregnancy carry for her, irrespective of what she consents to.

recedite

Nick Park wrote: »

Here is the position of many of the smaller Evangelical and Pentecostal denominations, and many independent churches, as explained in Evangelical Alliance Ireland's submission to the Citizens' Assembly. https://www.evangelical.ie/files/EAI_Citizens_Assembly_Submission.pdf

A well thought out submission. Unfortunately the "citizens assembly" seems to have ignored it. It will be interesting to see how the actual citizens behave in the voting booth. I have my doubts about whether the CA was a reasonable representative of the general public at all (as opposed to a bunch of mainly left wing activists with too much time on their hands)

Delirium wrote: »

But by refusing abortion on request, you're putting the protection of the unborn above that of the womans health. She's not allowed to make the best medical decision for her situation. If she's unwilling to risk her health/life and continue with the pregnancy, that choice should be respected.

No, its putting the life of the unborn above the health and convenience of the woman. And that is the whole crux of the matter. Some agree with that, some don't.

The evangelical Christians in the above document predicted a "false narrative of a battle between young liberal progressives and an older generation of backward conservative religionists" which is exactly the narrative that the CA perpetuated, and has now been adopted by the likes of trendy younger politicians like Harris and Varadkar. If this narrative was true, it would be political suicide for them to oppose it.
But is it? That is the question.

ouxbbkqtswdfaw

....... wrote:

This post has been deleted.

Best of luck to you.

.......

This post has been deleted.

ouxbbkqtswdfaw

....... wrote:

This post has been deleted.

I'm sorry but it does. He has a special place allocated for you.

.......

This post has been deleted.

ouxbbkqtswdfaw

Indeed, a non believer must still face the judgment seat of God. What's his position if he or she adds favouring abortion to their unbelief?

.......

This post has been deleted.

ouxbbkqtswdfaw

WhiteRoses wrote:

I've really thought about it and I don't think its wrong at all.

Fair dues to you. That's your decision. But I have to point out to you that God does not agree with you.

SusieBlue

fkx2nspcw9omhg wrote: »

You don't have to. But anyone who really thinks about abortion knows that it is wrong.

I've really thought about it and I don't think its wrong at all.

ouxbbkqtswdfaw

Delirium wrote:

And again, not Christian. I don't share your religious beliefs.

You don't have to. But anyone who really thinks about abortion knows that it is wrong.

Delirium

fkx2nspcw9omhg wrote: »

It doesn't matter whether you are Christian or not. God is the God of all, Christian, Hindu, Muslim etc. It is still gravely wrong.

And again, not Christian. I don't share your religious beliefs.

ouxbbkqtswdfaw

Delirium wrote:

Well, yes, I'm not Christian

It doesn't matter whether you are Christian or not. God is the God of all, Christian, Hindu, Muslim etc. It is still gravely wrong.

Delirium

fkx2nspcw9omhg wrote: »

You forget God in all of this. Each one of us must face the judgment seat of God. What are you to say when He knows that you killed an unborn, and did not repent?

Well, yes, I'm not Christian

ouxbbkqtswdfaw

Delirium wrote:

But by refusing abortion on request, you're putting the protection of the unborn above that of the womans health. She's not allowed to make the best medical decision for her situation. If she's unwilling to risk her health/life and continue with the pregnancy, that choice should be respected.

You forget God in all of this. Each one of us must face the judgment seat of God. What are you to say when He knows that you killed an unborn, and did not repent?

Delirium

end of the road wrote: »

on the surface i completely agree. however many people do believe the unborn must have protection as well as the mother's health, and the current proposals don't implement full protection for the unborn right from implantation, which will mean people having no option but to vote no to repeal.

But by refusing abortion on request, you're putting the protection of the unborn above that of the womans health. She's not allowed to make the best medical decision for her situation. If she's unwilling to risk her health/life and continue with the pregnancy, that choice should be respected.

end of the road

Delirium wrote: »

If you're concerned about a pregnant womans health, it's seem illogical to oppose repealing the eighth.

on the surface i completely agree. however many people do believe the unborn must have protection as well as the mother's health, and the current proposals don't implement full protection for the unborn right from implantation, which will mean people having no option but to vote no to repeal.

Delirium

NaFirinne wrote: »

Your correct abortion does have serious health repercussions for women, which is why we definitely need to save the 8th.

Abortion, particularly if it's early in the pregnancy, has less health risks for the woman compared to pregnancy.

Between 1998 and 2005, one woman died in childbirth for every 11,000 babies born, compared to one of 167,000 women who died due to abortion complications. It’s probably not too surprising considering that women are pregnant for nine months, leaving far more opportunity for complications to arise than in an individual procedure.

Source

So by not allowing a woman to choose to have an abortion her life is placed in more danger by a factor over 10 based on quoted stats.

If you're concerned about a pregnant womans health, it's seem illogical to oppose repealing the eighth.

J C

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

So after 1,730 posts I think it's pretty clear that the answer is a resounding 'Yes' to the thread question.

May I ask how you reached that (clearly erroneous) conclusion?

J C

Nick Park wrote: »

Here is the position of many of the smaller Evangelical and Pentecostal denominations, and many independent churches, as explained in Evangelical Alliance Ireland's submission to the Citizens' Assembly. http://www.evangelical.ie/files/EAI_Citizens_Assembly_Submission.pdf

Thanks Nick for the link.

Here are parts of the elegant and progressive submission of the EIA to the Ciitizens Assembly.
Quote:-
"The Eighth Amendment is not merely about religious dogma. EAI, in common with much of the population of Ireland today, is opposed to the imposition of religious dogma through State compulsion or legislation. However, we are concerned that the debate over the Eighth Amendment is being deliberately misrepresented as a false narrative of a battle between young liberal progressives and an older generation of backward conservative religionists. This false narrative conveniently sweeps very real Human Rights concerns under the carpet."

"Many of these ‘hard cases’ can be addressed without touching the Eighth Amendment at all – or by proposing minor adjustments to it. In such a scenario, we can be confident that the ensuing debate will focus on the needs of these extremely rare cases. What would be intolerable, and unforgivably dishonest, would be to exploit such heartrending cases in pursuit of removing the Eighth Amendment in its entirety and paving the way for abortion on demand. That would represent a cynical and reprehensible betrayal of those who are at the heart of very difficult ethical dilemmas and who deserve our compassion and undivided attention.
EAI, then, would strongly argue against any proposal to repeal the Eighth Amendment. We would see the Eighth Amendment as a positive Human Rights measure that is in keeping with Ireland’s growing reputation as a modern and compassionate democracy."

... so, the answer to my question from all of the member churches of the Evangelical Alliance Ireland is another resounding 'no'.

... so the four main church denominations in Ireland and the Evangelical Alliance Ireland are definitively opposed to the repeal of the 8th and the introduction of unlimited abortion for very good stated reasons ... so, I guess no Christian can, in conscience, vote for unlimted abortion ... by voting for the repeal of the 8th.

Nick Park

recedite wrote: »

I thought the style was concise and contained useful info. I don't think the positions of the minority christian churches has been quoted before on this thread?

Here is the position of many of the smaller Evangelical and Pentecostal denominations, and many independent churches, as explained in Evangelical Alliance Ireland's submission to the Citizens' Assembly. https://www.evangelical.ie/files/EAI_Citizens_Assembly_Submission.pdf

Bubbaclaus

So after 1,730 posts I think it's pretty clear that the answer is a resounding 'Yes' to the thread question.

SusieBlue

end of the road wrote: »

nope wrong, no high horse at all. just some home truths which are accurate. i understand they may be uncomfortable, but it's important the truth is told regardless of whether it's comfortable or uncomfortable.

YOUR OPINIONS ARE NOT FACTS.

end of the road

Nettle Soup wrote: »

That is one high horse!! Wow.

nope wrong, no high horse at all. just some home truths which are accurate. i understand they may be uncomfortable, but it's important the truth is told regardless of whether it's comfortable or uncomfortable.

J C wrote: »

I was quoting an Irish Times article ... and I don't know why this could make you nauseous ... the Irish Times is a paper of record, not known for emotionalism.

Yes, I'm attempting to answer my own question allright ... and the answer coming from the four main Churches is a resounding no !!

This isn't shutting down debate ... just winning it ... because the pro-abortion proponents don't actually have many valid arguments when faced with the arguments against repealing the 8th and introducing unrestricted abortion.

They seem to be relying on pointing to a few hypothetical hard cases ... and then concluding that the solution has to be the repeal of the 8th and unlimited abortion ... which are actually two massive non sequiturs.

not forgetting that they have to find problems for which to suggest abortion on demand as the solution to. for example, the issues with our systems is a very common problem for which they suggest abortion on demand as the solution, rather then campaigning for the systems to be sorted out.

recedite

Nettle Soup wrote: »

posting style is nautious

Why not address the substance of the post, and not the style?

I thought the style was concise and contained useful info. I don't think the positions of the minority christian churches has been quoted before on this thread?

Also, get yourself a spellchecker

J C

Nettle Soup wrote: »

So you are replying to your own OP now?
I have to say your posting style is nautious and tries to shut down debate.

Yes, I'm attempting to answer my own question allright ... and the answer coming from the four main Churches is a resounding no !!

This isn't shutting down debate ... just winning it ... because the pro-abortion proponents don't actually have many valid arguments when faced with the arguments against repealing the 8th and introducing unrestricted abortion.

They seem to be relying on pointing to a few hypothetical hard cases ... and then concluding that the solution is the repeal of the 8th and unlimited abortion ... which are actually two massive non sequiturs.

Nettle Soup

J C wrote: »

To help answer the OP question on whether a Christian can vote for unlimited abortion ... the following is an Irish Times summary of the position of the four main churches in Ireland on the issue ... and it's a no.

Quote:-
"The Church of Ireland’s two archbishops have said they cannot accept an Oireachtas Committee proposal to allow unrestricted abortion during the first 12 weeks of a pregnancy.

They could not accept unrestricted abortion at any stage of pregnancy, they have said.

It means that all four main churches in Ireland are now opposed to the recommendation of the Oireachtas Committee on the Eighth Amendment.

The Catholic Church has expressed “vehement opposition” to abortion in all circumstances while the Presbyterian Church in Ireland, as expressed by former moderators Rev Drs Trevor Morrow and Norman Hamilton last month, was “very gravely concerned” about the Committee proposal “to introduce abortion with no restriction as to reason until the twelfth week of gestation, and beyond 12 weeks on health grounds”.

In a statement last month also the Methodist Church in Ireland said “our opposition to abortion on demand includes this first trimester”. The church has “consistently been against abortion on demand,” it said.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/religion-and-beliefs/church-of-ireland-opposes-unrestricted-abortion-in-first-12-weeks-of-pregnancy-1.3381237

So you are replying to your own OP now?
I have to say your posting style is nautious and tries to shut down debate.