Pro-lifers seem to think it's the latter.
― Wes Brodicus, Tuesday, 25 October 2016 08:50 (seven years ago) link
Matthew 18:8 implies that a mother with a life-threatening pregnancy ought to abort because she will go to hell if she dies with an unbaptized fetus in her womb. I feel like a lot of evangelicals could get on board with that interpretation: it's so brutal it could almost be a Chick tract.
― hippie lady from california who loves that god (unregistered), Tuesday, 25 October 2016 12:54 (seven years ago) link
If you consider the difference between "offend thee" and "offend God," pretty much any abortion would be permissible.
― Wes Brodicus, Tuesday, 25 October 2016 14:12 (seven years ago) link
pro-lifers don't accept a fetus as a part of a woman's body, so would reject the notion that matthew 18:8 applies to a fetus.
― mystery local boy (rushomancy), Tuesday, 25 October 2016 14:15 (seven years ago) link
There's an old testament passage that specifies the punishment for harming a woman in a way that causes miscarriage. It is a lesser punishment than the punishment for causing a person's death, so at least the OT would not appear to view a fetus as equal to a human life.
― the last famous person you were surprised to discover was actually (man alive), Tuesday, 25 October 2016 15:37 (seven years ago) link
My response:
Jesus wept
― The burrito of ennui (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 25 October 2016 15:46 (seven years ago) link
Haha I don't think Jesus would resort to weeping given the current situation.
John 3:16 vs Luke 10:27 fite
― Wes Brodicus, Tuesday, 25 October 2016 15:56 (seven years ago) link
Automatic thread bump. This poll is closing tomorrow.
― System, Thursday, 24 November 2016 00:01 (seven years ago) link
Automatic thread bump. This poll's results are now in.
― System, Friday, 25 November 2016 00:01 (seven years ago) link