3 ms·

Opinions on abortion among many christian groups have been pretty fluid in the past century[1]. > The rhetoric about abortion being the catalyst for the rise o

Opinions on abortion among many christian groups have been pretty fluid in the past century[1]. > The rhetoric about abortion being the catalyst for the rise of the Religious Right, however, collapses under scrutiny. Evangelicals considered abortion a “Catholic issue” until the late 1970s. In 1968, the flagship evangelical magazine Christianity Today convened a conference with another evangelical organization, Christian Medical Society, to discuss the ethics of abortion. After several days of deliberations, twenty-six evangelical theologians issued a statement acknowledging that they could not agree on any one position, that the ambiguities of the issue allowed for many different approaches. “Whether the performance of an induced abortion is sinful we are not agreed,” the statement read, “but about the necessity of it and permissibility for it under certain circumstances we are in accord.” The statement cited “individual health, family welfare, and social responsibility” as possible justifications for abortion and allowed for instances when fetal life “may have to be abandoned to maintain full and secure family life.” And this is a real eye-opener: > Baptists, in particular, applauded the Roe decision as an appropriate articulation of the line of division between church and state, between personal morality and state regulation of individual behavior. “Religious liberty, human equality and justice are advanced by the Supreme Court abortion decision,” W. Barry Garrett of Baptist Press wrote. [1] https://religiondispatches.org/the-evangelical-abortion-myth-an-excerpt-from-bad-faith/ https://religiondispatches.org/the-evangelical-abortion-myth...

nvahalik 3y ago
[flagged]
- mullingitover 3y ago
  [flagged]
rayiner 3y ago
Why restrict your analysis to such a narrow scope? Abortion was illegal in every state in the US by 1910. It’s also still illegal in my home country, which is a Muslim country on the other side of the planet from the US. Opposition to abortion is longstanding across completely different cultures and religions. It’s not credible to say it’s something that arises from evangelical Christianity or a late 20th century political movement. What you’re describing is instead an ideological schism within Protestant Christianity. Since Luther, Protestant Christianity had a strong natalist orientation. That’s why abortion was illegal in every US state by 1910. But during the 20th century, mainline protestantism adopted an anti-natalist view out of concerns about overpopulation and the welfare of the poor. That’s the genesis of the modern US abortion debate. It’s not accurate to say that these patterns reflect views on abortion being “fluid.” Protestantism isn’t centralized—especially denominations like Baptists. Until the mid-20th century, pretty much all the denominations agreed abortion was wrong. Once the anti-natal movement got going, those denominations fractured and people sorted into different ones. For example, the Evangelical Presbyterian church split from what’s now the PCUSA in 1981. Both are “evangelical.” But we apply the “evangelical” label to one and not the other, based on their views on abortion and other issues.
- mullingitover 3y ago
  > Abortion was illegal in every state in the US by 1910. Let's be clear about what was illegal, because the radical definition, 'life begins at fertilization', is a recent innovation[1]: > Abortion was not always a crime. During the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, abortion of early pregnancy was legal under common law.[22] Abortions were illegal only after "quickening," the point at which a pregnant woman could feel the movements of the fetus (approximately the fourth month of pregnancy). The common law's attitude toward pregnancy and abortion was based on an understanding of pregnancy and human development as a process rather than an absolute moment. Indeed, the term abortion referred only to the miscarriages of later pregnancies, after quickening. [1] https://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft967nb5z5&chunk.id=d0e195 https://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft967n...
  - rayiner 3y ago
    I’m not talking about the common law. Due to medical advances in the 1800s, abortion was illegal at all stages of pregnancy in the US by 1910. Also, “life begins at conception,” or at another very early stage, isn’t a Christian innovation. That’s the belief in Shia Islam. Certain Sunni schools also prohibit abortion at any stage. In Thailand, a Buddhist country, abortion was illegal at all stages of pregnancy until 2021. Same thing in Hinduism: https://indiacurrents.com/a-hindu-view-on-abortion/ https://indiacurrents.com/a-hindu-view-on-abortion/ Prohibitions against abortion, even at early stages, are common across the world’s belief systems. Perhaps the only thing you could call uncommon is the view that abortion is impermissible even to save the life of the mother. But that’s an uncommon view even within evangelical Christianity.
    - mullingitover 3y ago
      These are all great examples of the bandwagon fallacy, but if we're going off popular appeal then why don't we see the abortion debates put to rest once and for all by popular vote? The answer of course is that abortion rights would win by a healthy margin[1] if the public had any say in the matter. > Pro-choice sentiment is now the highest Gallup has measured since 1995 when it was 56% -- the only other time it has been at the current level or higher -- while the 39% identifying as "pro-life" is the lowest since 1996. [1] https://news.gallup.com/poll/393104/pro-choice-identification-rises-near-record-high.aspx https://news.gallup.com/poll/393104/pro-choice-identificatio...

nvahalik 3y ago

[flagged]

mullingitover 3y ago
[flagged]

rayiner 3y ago

Why restrict your analysis to such a narrow scope? Abortion was illegal in every state in the US by 1910. It’s also still illegal in my home country, which is a Muslim country on the other side of the planet from the US. Opposition to abortion is longstanding across completely different cultures and religions. It’s not credible to say it’s something that arises from evangelical Christianity or a late 20th century political movement. What you’re describing is instead an ideological schism within Protestant Christianity. Since Luther, Protestant Christianity had a strong natalist orientation. That’s why abortion was illegal in every US state by 1910. But during the 20th century, mainline protestantism adopted an anti-natalist view out of concerns about overpopulation and the welfare of the poor. That’s the genesis of the modern US abortion debate. It’s not accurate to say that these patterns reflect views on abortion being “fluid.” Protestantism isn’t centralized—especially denominations like Baptists. Until the mid-20th century, pretty much all the denominations agreed abortion was wrong. Once the anti-natal movement got going, those denominations fractured and people sorted into different ones. For example, the Evangelical Presbyterian church split from what’s now the PCUSA in 1981. Both are “evangelical.” But we apply the “evangelical” label to one and not the other, based on their views on abortion and other issues.

mullingitover 3y ago
> Abortion was illegal in every state in the US by 1910. Let's be clear about what was illegal, because the radical definition, 'life begins at fertilization', is a recent innovation[1]: > Abortion was not always a crime. During the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, abortion of early pregnancy was legal under common law.[22] Abortions were illegal only after "quickening," the point at which a pregnant woman could feel the movements of the fetus (approximately the fourth month of pregnancy). The common law's attitude toward pregnancy and abortion was based on an understanding of pregnancy and human development as a process rather than an absolute moment. Indeed, the term abortion referred only to the miscarriages of later pregnancies, after quickening. [1] https://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft967nb5z5&chunk.id=d0e195 https://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft967n...
- rayiner 3y ago
  I’m not talking about the common law. Due to medical advances in the 1800s, abortion was illegal at all stages of pregnancy in the US by 1910. Also, “life begins at conception,” or at another very early stage, isn’t a Christian innovation. That’s the belief in Shia Islam. Certain Sunni schools also prohibit abortion at any stage. In Thailand, a Buddhist country, abortion was illegal at all stages of pregnancy until 2021. Same thing in Hinduism: https://indiacurrents.com/a-hindu-view-on-abortion/ https://indiacurrents.com/a-hindu-view-on-abortion/ Prohibitions against abortion, even at early stages, are common across the world’s belief systems. Perhaps the only thing you could call uncommon is the view that abortion is impermissible even to save the life of the mother. But that’s an uncommon view even within evangelical Christianity.
  - mullingitover 3y ago
    These are all great examples of the bandwagon fallacy, but if we're going off popular appeal then why don't we see the abortion debates put to rest once and for all by popular vote? The answer of course is that abortion rights would win by a healthy margin[1] if the public had any say in the matter. > Pro-choice sentiment is now the highest Gallup has measured since 1995 when it was 56% -- the only other time it has been at the current level or higher -- while the 39% identifying as "pro-life" is the lowest since 1996. [1] https://news.gallup.com/poll/393104/pro-choice-identification-rises-near-record-high.aspx https://news.gallup.com/poll/393104/pro-choice-identificatio...