• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

It is hypocritical to use religion and the Bible to justify opposition to abortion.

ppp

Well-Known Member
I think we have a scripture for that: :)
I am sure that you think that matters. :shrug:

FULdrzJWYAERXOJ
 
Last edited by a moderator:

TagliatelliMonster

Veteran Member
You are correct... it deals with the value of an unborn child and its unnatural ejection from the womb.
No it doesn't.

This is about a third party attacking a pregnant woman and the woman miscarrying due to the violent act.
This has nothing to do with the abortion debate.
 

paradox

(㇏(•̀ᵥᵥ•́)ノ)
There are countless verses in the Bible that are not "pro-life." To begin, I'll tell you about Noah's Ark, in which the Bible's God drowns the entire earth in a rage-fueled flood. Given that some of the women were probably pregnant when God drowned them in his wrath, that doesn't sound very "pro-life." That indicates that in just the first book of the Bible, God was responsible for the death of the unborn.
God did kind of repent for doing this Genesis 8:20-22

Therefore if your argument is that God did that, then it's normal to expect that pro-abortion people repent as well and stop doing what they are doing.
 

Kenny

Face to face with my Father
Premium Member
Is it an objective fact that the world is not flat? That would seem to be an example wouldn't you say?

Yet there are those who still believe its flat even as there are those who believe prayer is an effort in futility.
 

TagliatelliMonster

Veteran Member
I disagree.

I can only blame that on stubborness.

I'm sorry you don't see the obvious difference between a third party attacking someone and a person herself making a decision.


Consider the difference between having sex with mutual consent on the one hand and being raped on the other.

In both cases, people have sex.
Do you see a difference though?

It's the same difference.
 

Sheldon

Veteran Member
Sheldon said:
Is it an objective fact that the world is not flat? That would seem to be an example wouldn't you say?
Yet there are those who still believe its flat

You seem to have ignored yet another question. Is it an objective fact that world is not flat? I am not asking what preposterous beliefs people hold. I answered your question:

KenS said:
When does reality conform to what you think is objective?

You either agree that the assertion the world is not flat is an objective fact or you do not. If you do, then that would be an example of reality conforming to what I also believe to be objectively true. Which coincides with the
overwhelming objective evidence, and not by accident obviously.
 

Kenny

Face to face with my Father
Premium Member
I can only blame that on stubborness.

I'm sorry you don't see the obvious difference between a third party attacking someone and a person herself making a decision.


Consider the difference between having sex with mutual consent on the one hand and being raped on the other.

In both cases, people have sex.
Do you see a difference though?

It's the same difference.
Your context was in the scriptural quote.

So, are you saying the person birthed through rape is not valuable and should be discarded?
 

Kenny

Face to face with my Father
Premium Member
You seem to have ignored yet another question. Is it an objective fact that world is not flat? I am not asking what preposterous beliefs people hold. I answered your question:



You either agree that the assertion the world is not flat is an objective fact or you do not. If you do, then that would be an example of reality conforming to what I also believe to be objectively true. Which coincides with the
overwhelming objective evidence, and not by accident obviously.
Nice strawman.
 
Top