Why my faith calls me to defend women’s reproductive rights

View Photo Gallery: The Catholic Church in particular is credited with organizing and driving the anti-abortion movement for decades, but religious … Continued


View Photo Gallery: The Catholic Church in particular is credited with organizing and driving the anti-abortion movement for decades, but religious arguments shape the pro-choice side, too.

A recent On Faith column, ‘A Prayer for Abortion?’, isn’t a full accounting of how people of faith consider women’s health issues.

As the chair of the Planned Parenthood Clergy Advisory Board, I work with faith leaders from all different traditions and backgrounds. We strongly believe that women and men are moral agents, able to make their own decisions about their reproductive needs.

I also understand that for many women, abortion is a deeply personal and complex decision, often influenced by their faith and background.

My faith plays an integral part in my own thoughts and feelings about abortion. Over time, these feelings have transformed from judgment to love as I matured in my spirituality.

My mother, a secretary in a maternity ward, used to tell me stories about women dying from complicated pregnancies because they were told that it was a sin to have an abortion, even if it meant saving their lives.

Our sacred texts and traditions teach us that women have the right to take care of their bodies. So when I graduated Yale Divinity School in 1991, I made the decision to support women as a core part of my ministry.

I took a job as a counselor in an independent clinic that performed abortions. I remember the daily protests outside my office window. For many women coming to the clinic, it was a difficult situation to face.

It pains me now to hear that many women across the country are facing similar situations when they need access to health care. It seems like every day lawmakers are trying to limit access to care, putting women’s health at risk.

Like in Virginia, where the governor recently signed a bill that mandates doctors perform pre-abortion ultrasound procedures that may not be medically necessary and could force a woman to make two trips if she needs an abortion.

Lawmakers should not try to play priest or doctor. Women don’t turn to politicians to help them make these decisions. They turn to their faith for moral guidance and their doctors for health care. Lawmakers shouldn’t be injecting government into this very private decision a woman makes.

The bottom line is that women must be treated with dignity and receive the best medical care possible.

As a pastor with years of both academic and supervised pastoral care experience, I’ve heard so many different stories from both sides of the aisle. Unfortunately, the rhetoric of the public abortion debate overlooks the fact that a woman is capable of making decisions for herself.

So I have a simple message for women who are considering an abortion or may have had an abortion: God loves you. No one should tell you any different.

And yes, I do pray for women and men to have harassment-free access to the health care they need. I remember what it was like to be a staff member at a health center and I remember what many women faced when they needed important health care.

That’s why, no matter what situation you may be faced with, we all need to remember that unconditional compassion is a great blessing to be able to offer.

Rev. Jane Emma Newall is the Chair of the Planned Parenthood Clergy Advisory Board. She is the founding pastor of the Rainbow Cathedral Metropolitan Community Church and lives in Connecticut.

  • cricket44

    The column you mention was a misogynistic, mindless, factless rant, and was supported by similar brains.

    “The bottom line is that women must be treated with dignity and receive the best medical care possible.”

    Simple, isn’t it? Thank you and blessings for the work you do supporting women in crisis.

    “So I have a simple message for women who are considering an abortion or may have had an abortion: God loves you. No one should tell you any different.”

    Amen

  • jovan1

    Thank you for speaking truth to power. In the past couple of months, we have seen full frontal misogyny by those claiming to be speaking for God. We need to, and we must, continue to out those who would use religion as a cudgel to discriminate against women.

    Middle East Muslims are NOT the only ones who have misogynistic attitudes towards women. The USCCB and the religious right has those same misogynistic attitudes towards women, as well.

  • cricket44

    Scott, your opinion is your opinion is your opinion, and it stems from contempt of women.

    You’ve been clear enough, and not a reasoned argument to be found (no, don’t bother pulling up what you thought was “reason” before…it wasn’t.)

  • quiensabe

    You’ve presented a new argument for ending the lives of children, Reverend. So,now it’s an outbreak of spiritual growth?

  • cricket44

    Nope. She didn’t reference children at all. Perhaps you’re confusing this with a different article.

  • globalone

    “Unfortunately, the rhetoric of the public abortion debate overlooks the fact that a woman is capable of making decisions for herself.”

    Making a decision and holding someone accountable for that decision are two totally separate items. Your statement seems to infer that pregnancy is thrust upon women without their consent or their control, and that the only recourse they have is the decision that comes afterward. Not likely.
    Women make decisions to engage in sexual intercourse, which, in some cases, leads to pregnancy. This isn’t a secret to which women aren’t aware.

    You don’t get a free pass for making a BAD DECISION by shirking responsibility and claiming you are more than capable of making a good decision.

  • haveaheart

    All of you self-righteous, God-fearing misogynists seem to have little respect for your diety’s ability to enforce his own rule of law. You always seem to be out there doing it for him. Don’t you trust him to do the “right thing”?

  • cricket44

    Consent to sex is NOT consent to pregnancy. Abortion is NOT “shirking responsibility.”

    But if you *are* that concerned about abortion, I can only assume you are out lecturing all males to stay celibate since every pregnancy has risks that may necessitate abortion….and you care, just so very much.

  • cricket44

    And you still don’t understand what “consent” means.

    To equate child support with the risks women take in pregnancy is disgusting…and typical of your arguments.

  • cricket44

    “Same thing.”

    Thank you for the clear illustration of ignorance.. It explains quite a bit.

  • cricket44

    *shrug* I have facts, you have opinion.

  • cricket44

    ” understand the discomforts involved with pregnancy, but they are just that — discomforts. ”

    No, you don’t. I would suggest that you educate yourself but that would assume an actual interest in the wellbeing of the woman so I doubt you’ll bother. And it doesn’t matter how often it happens, although more than you obviously want to believe, the risks are with every pregnancy and delivery so only the woman is qualified to make the decision as to whether to take them. I’ll ignore your obvious attempts to bait.

    A person consenting to sex is consenting to only that. It’s not so difficult to understand. Do tell about “implied consent.” Is that like “well, she didn’t scream “no” loud enough so that means she wanted it?”

    Every individual (actual individual) has the right take care of themselves and has physical autonomy. Forced childbirth removes that. Not because I say so, because that’s the fact of it.

    You have your beliefs that you like and that’s fine. But they only apply to you.

    I know you won’t think it through, you’ll come back with your belief, but it still won’t make it a fact.

  • HKnox

    Thanks, Jane, for a powerful call for true pastoral care for all women and men making often difficult decisions about their families, themselves, and their communities. We must redouble our efforts to empower people to make their own decisions responsibly and to advocate for as many health options as possible for women. Women need more options, not fewer, as they seek to care for their families and themselves.

  • shirleyafreeman

    Our law is based, in part, on the Judeo-Christian roots of justice in English Common Law, I was taught, and have accepted. Drawing on this background, it seems that faith is an important element of good judgement in the matter of the pro-life vs. the pro-choice debate..

    The Scripture places the greatest weight on the safety and well-being of children, both in the Old and New Testaments, and prescribes very serious punishments for failure to protect and sustain children…along with justice, health and well-being for adults, both women and men, of course..

    I can’t personally see the basis in Scripture for disregarding the rights of the conceived but not yet born members of our families in favor of women’s right to choose.

    We know that we have the right to choose either delaying sex or using contraception before having sex, although I know contraceptives are not always effective.

    But once a baby has been conceived, for me the weight of the Scripture is on the side of every possible consideration, safety, nurture, good training and education for the child more than for the parent..

    Maybe God would be more pleased if we pray for His guidance in finding a national consensus on this issue.

  • amelia45

    An abortion that saves the life of the mother or protects her future ability to have children, is health care. An abortion that results from the trauma of rape that a woman cannot bear to continue is health care. An abortion that keeps a family able to pay the bills and feed the other children they do have is health care for all the others.

    If you want to drastically reduce the number of abortions, support accessibility of contraceptives – and that includes funding for such sources as Planned Parenthood. Support sex education in our schools and churches. If you want women to not have an abortion then support them with health care, housing, food, while they bear the child they will give up for adoption, and then help them get back on track with the education or job they dropped out of to have a child.

    But, those decisions don’t belong to you, to a Church, or to the wisdom of politicians.

  • leibowde84

    Man … you are living in the 1800s, quiensabe. You sound like a tea-partier.

  • leibowde84

    But, this conversation should never be had by men. This is a women’s health issue, and the fact that men are in this conversation is appalling. Women should make these difficult choices without know-nothing-know-it-alls harassing them about it. You try to glorify yourselves by claiming that you are saving “lives,” but you are really just a bully who loves to pick fights.

  • Counterww

    That is right cricket, no mention of the children in the article. Says a lot about this liberal ” faith” the so alled reverend has. She has more dedication to PP than what God has to say on the topic.

  • lastofall

    Sorry, but they can modify righteousness to accommodate sin all the day long, and it still will not overturn what is sin according to God. Of course in this present evil secular world sin is acceptable, so it is of no amazement when sin is legalized.

  • ccnl1

    Reproductive right does not include the right to be stupid!!! —————–>>

    To wit:

    The reality of se-x, contraception and STD control: – from a guy who enjoys intelligent se-x-

    Note: Some words hyphenated to defeat an obvious word filter. …

    The Brutal Effects of Stupidity:

    : The failures of the widely used birth “control” methods i.e. the Pill ( 8.7% failure rate) and male con-dom (17.4% failure rate) have led to the large rate of abortions and S-TDs in the USA. Men and women must either recognize their responsibilities by using the Pill or co-ndoms properly and/or use safer methods in order to reduce the epidemics of abortion and S-TDs.- Failure rate statistics provided by the Gut-tmacher Inst-itute. Unfortunately they do not give the statistics for doubling up i.e. using a combination of the Pill and a condom.

    Added information before making your next move:

    from the CDC-2006

    “Se-xually transmitted diseases (STDs) remain a major public health challenge in the United States. While substantial progress has been made in preventing, diagnosing, and treating certain S-TDs in recent years, CDC estimates that approximately 19 million new infections occur each year, almost half of them among young people ages 15 to 24.1 In addition to the physical and psy-ch-ological consequences of S-TDs, these diseases also exact a tremendous economic toll. Direct medical costs as-sociated with STDs in the United States are estimated at up to $14.7 billion annually in 2006 dollars.”

    And from:

    Consumer Reports, January, 2012

    “Yes, or-al se-x is se-x, and it can boost cancer risk-

    Here’s a crucial message for teens (and all se-xually active “post-teeners”: Or-al se-x carries many of the same risks as va-ginal se-x, including human papilloma virus, or HPV. And HPV may now be overtaking tobacco as the leading cause of or-al cancers in America in people under age 50.

    “Adolescents don’t think or-al se-x is something to worry about,” said Bonnie Halpern-Felsher profes

  • EricS1

    What a hypocrite?!

    How about some “unconditional compassion” for the defenseless unborn child that gets killed in an abortion.

    You blithely overlook the FACT that the vast majority of abortions done in this country are done out of CONVENIENCE… no pressing life-or-death healthcare crisis for the pregnant woman, just that the pregnancy isn’t “convenient”.

    If we were only talking about abortions in circumstances of rape or incest, the “compassion” discussion might be different. However, these circumstances are a single-digit percentage of the whole.

    My question is always, “Why does the unborn child HAVE to die?!”

    Why isn’t adoption a highly-encouraged alternative? There are so many families who want to adopt newborn babies. Why do American families need to fly overseas to find them when so many more could be made available here in the US if we didn’t abort them.

    It’s almost like abortion is part of some sort of pagan human sacrifice ritual where some deity is appeased by the death of the unborn child.

  • lynnman1

    Reverend – I understand that you think you are being caring to women by supporting abortion but you must be smart enough to know that the examples you raise are the rare exception and a disingenous argument for justifying the millions and millions of abortions on demand that are the real issue. Watching the abortion of a child with a beating heart and feelings cannot be justified for those abortions on demand and dare I say nothing that Jesus, the Holy Spirt or our Father in heaven would agree with you on. These lives are the most innocent that deserve our protection and the right to continue living. You are giving cover to many young women under more than shameful pretenses,

  • cricket44

    Beautifully written and yes, I think maturity does play a part in this debate. I’m sure you will be hit with factless hyperbole and hysteria in respons, by anti-choicers, but thank you for speaking up.

  • cricket44

    No, she just uses facts. I know that’s hard for anti-choice folks to comprehend.

  • cricket44

    If you are serious about ending the need for abortion, I assume you lecture every man you see about staying virginal. Otherwise you are exhibiting rank hypocrisy.

  • cricket44

    Convenience is a catch-all word for the subjective notions of the person who uses it. Basically nonsensical.

    At the time of most abortions, the zygote/embryo/fetus is no older than 12-16 weeks so to use the word “child” is pretty much lying.

  • usapdx

    If your teenage daughter was raped, what would you do?

  • persiflage

    Flaming reactionary males have all but cornered the market on anti-choice rhetoric – all they need now is a uterus and they’d have a valid point of view.

    Shoring up repressive extremism with religion is another testosterone driven quirk…….what’s good for national defense is obviously bad for women’s reproductive rights.

  • persiflage

    I was just now thinking that the histrionic ploy is a kind of ad hominum rear–guard attack strategy favored by the religious right. When it comes to hyperbolic misdirection, you just can’t beat a riled up bible thumper .

    I don’t care which denomination we’re taking about…..since they’re all derived originally from the One True Holy Apostolic Catholic Church.

    Martin Luther was an apostate – just another disenchanted Catholic cleric with authoritarian instincts that wanted to build a better imaginary world.

  • ccnl1

    Reproductive right does not include the right to be stupid!!! —————–>>

    To wit:

    The reality of se-x, contraception and STD control: – from a guy who enjoys intelligent se-x-

    Note: Some words hyphenated to defeat an obvious word filter. …

    The Brutal Effects of Stupidity:

    : The failures of the widely used birth “control” methods i.e. the Pill ( 8.7% actual failure rate) and male con-dom (17.4% actual failure rate) have led to the large rate of abortions and S-TDs in the USA. Men and women must either recognize their responsibilities by using the Pill or co-ndoms properly and/or use safer methods in order to reduce the epidemics of abortion and S-TDs.- Failure rate statistics provided by the Gut-tmacher Inst-itute. Unfortunately they do not give the statistics for doubling up i.e. using a combination of the Pill and a condom.

    Added information before making your next move:

    from the CDC-2006

    “Se-xually transmitted diseases (STDs) remain a major public health challenge in the United States. While substantial progress has been made in preventing, diagnosing, and treating certain S-TDs in recent years, CDC estimates that approximately 19 million new infections occur each year, almost half of them among young people ages 15 to 24.1 In addition to the physical and psy-ch-ological consequences of S-TDs, these diseases also exact a tremendous economic toll. Direct medical costs as-sociated with STDs in the United States are estimated at up to $14.7 billion annually in 2006 dollars.”

    And from:

    Consumer Reports, January, 2012

    “Yes, or-al se-x is se-x, and it can boost cancer risk-

    Here’s a crucial message for teens (and all se-xually active “post-teeners”: Or-al se-x carries many of the same risks as va-ginal se-x, including human papilloma virus, or HPV. And HPV may now be overtaking tobacco as the leading cause of or-al cancers in America in people under age 50.

    “Adolescents don’t think or-al se-x is something to worry about,” sa

  • dcrswm

    What god has to say? If you’re hearing voices Counterww you should seek help……

  • dcrswm

    The bible is pretty clear on this, force her to marry the rapist.

  • dcrswm

    Wait, are you trying to tell me I didn’t have scrambled chickens for breakfast?

  • Catken1

    Nine months of being inhabited by someone else, having your bodily systems and physical resources diverted to their good, at great cost to you in time, energy, work, money, and pain, being kicked and pummelled from within, feeling constantly nauseated and unable to eat for much of the day for the first three months and having no comfortable sleeping position available for the last three, being unable even to WALK comfortably during the last month or so, having your internal organs, even your bones, distended and stretched out of place, having your moods affected to the point where you sometimes don’t even feel like you anymore, and then undergoing the agonizing pain and work of labor, with your body and mind permanently altered by the experience, is more than a mere “inconvenience.”

    Giving blood – now that’s an “inconvenience,” a triviality. And it saves lives. (A woman can save more lives in nine months through giving whole blood regularly – even more if she gives platelets – than she can make in one pregnancy, unless she’s the Octomom…) But it is not mandatory, because blood is part of a person’s body, and it is their choice to give or withhold it to another, even if their choice to say no costs another person their life.

    Why does some born child HAVE to die because you found going in to the blood donor site “inconvenient” that day, or because you don’t like needles?

    Because your body is your own, and no other human owns it, plain and simple.

  • Catken1

    “As to rape, please tell me what the child did to deserve death. Kill the rapist, and save the child. ”

    So if I attack you brutally, and steal your body parts to support my child, is it OK because the child is innocent?

    But of course, a pregnant woman isn’t human in your eyes, but property, and even a rapist may seize her body to promote the good of his offspring. It’s murder for her to say no, because she does not own her body – her body belongs to any fetus who is implanted inside her.

    If you really care about “preventing murder”, and deem a woman’s refusal to allow another person to inhabit her and use her body to be “murder”, show us a good example. Make YOUR body public property. Give YOUR resources up to whomever needs them, and take away your legal right to say no to anyone who needs to use your body to survive, whatever the cost to you as a result.

    But of course, you’re human, a fetus is human, a woman is a thing to be used without concern for her feelings or for what happens to her as a result.

  • Catken1

    “Just like Catken and Cricket, she doesn’t want to hear anything contrary to her religion — the worship of the god Convenience by child sacrifice. ”

    Go through a real pregnancy and tell me it’s an “inconvenience”:

    But of course, your religion allows you to kill all the innocent doe-eyed children out there who need to use YOUR body to survive, if you can’t stomach the “inconvenience” of an hour spent donating blood. Nine months of being inhabited and having all your physical resources diverted to someone else’s good, with permanent alterations to one’s body, mind and heart? A trivial thing (because it can never be asked of ScottinVA, who’s fully human, but only of Bad Women who have s-e-x). An hour’s time, ten minutes of which is spent with a needle in your arm, and a pint of easily-replaced body fluid, with no permanent consequences? A great sacrifice which can never be commanded of you, only freely given.

    Hypocrite. Hope it feels good to sit up there on your smug high horse, bragging about how moral you are to save lives at someone else’s cost in time, energy, effort, and pain. Really easy to make the sacrifices involved in pregnancy from a distance, on someone else’s behalf, without having to do any of the work yourself.

    Be honorable about this. Give up YOUR right to choose who may and may not use your body, in favor of protecting the right to life of real, undisputed human beings. Go ahead, do it.

  • Catken1

    “The female body is DESIGNED to give birth, and does so without incident in all but a very few cases. ”

    Without death or permanent mutilation – yes. Without incident – no. Go through a pregnancy and tell me it’s not hard work, that it doesn’t involve great pain and energy.

    “Are you saying that a person who consents to drive a care is not consenting to compensate for care anyone he hits with that car? Are you saying that someone who digs a hole is not responsible for anyone who falls into it? Are you saying a person who manufactures a product is not responsible for anyone hurt by the that product?”

    In none of these cases is the first person EVER required to donate the use of their internal organs or body parts to the injured party. Not ever.

    “it’s unfortunate for the child who is not capable of making his own decisions, ”

    I am not capable of deciding for someone else whether or not I may have the use of their body and body parts. That is entirely their prerogative. Even if they injured me, even if it’s my mother or father who brought me into being.

    “The point is that childbirth has minimal risks, though they are there. ”

    Donating blood has far less risk. Why are you never, ever legally required to donate blood even to the most helpless, innocent doe-eyed child who will die without it – even if it’s YOUR child?

    “If so, then there are new drugs and procedures that can make childbirth nearly painless. ”

    Are there drugs and procedures that can make pregnancy not demand a whole heck of a lot of time, energy and resources from a woman?

    Having sex is not consent to nine months of being treated as someone else’s property, without the right to say no.

    If I EXPLICITLY agree to give someone else bone marrow – not implied in my participation in some other activity, not even implied by my injuring them, but my EXPLICIT, WRITTEN consent – they are put on a drug regimen that will kill them if I don’t end up giving them the donation after all. (Chances of finding another donor are practic

  • Catken1

    “Yes, men have no say when women murder children; it is their god-given right! ”

    I have no right to any say when men murder children by denying them the right to their body parts, blood supply, or other physical resources. It is their right to own their body and determine who may or may not use it.

    A pregnant woman is not an incubating machine, she is not property, she is not a thing to be used. She is a full human being, with the same ownership rights over her body and internal organs that you have, no fewer.

  • Catken1

    “Please present the DNA evidence that proves that a zygote is not a living human being. ”

    Please present the DNA evidence that proves that its mother is not a living human being.

    Please provide me one case where one living human being is allowed to use the internal organs and/or body parts of another without that person’s continuing and explicit consent.

    “Please present the evidence that an unborn child is significantly different one second before his birth than one second after. ”

    But that’s exactly what you argue – that the unborn child is worthy of protection at the expense of someone else’s human status and bodily autonomy, but the born child is not. The unborn child has the right to own another’s body and body parts, but the born child has not.

    I simply argue that both born and unborn children have the same rights, and that NEITHER of them have the right to inhabit and/or use the body of a person who doesn’t want them to, just as you and I do not.

    “Please present evidence that the preponderance of abortions is NOT for the convenience of the mother. ”

    Please present evidence suggesting that pregnancy is less “inconvenient” than blood donation, or bone marrow donation, or even nursing – all things one human has the right to refuse another for any reason whatsoever, even mere whim.

  • eddikon

    You make it all sound so wonderful. Sorta like putting a necktie on a pig, it’s still a pig.

  • eddikon

    You need some new arguments, the company line is starting to sound a tad rustic. Abortion has shown the “Matriarchy” to be just as morally bankrupt as the “Patriarchy”. The Abortion Rights Movement uses the same basic logic as the slave-owners did prior to the Civil War: Dehumanize it and you can do whatever you desire to it. It’s not a baby, it’s a fetus. It’s not a human, it’s chattel. Do what you will with your body, but try telling the truth when you name your wonderful, informed choices. How are you any different from the reactionary racists of the Antebellum Era?

  • usapdx

    dcrswm, is that what you do with your daughter? What if he was not the correct type of male in any way? What if you could not find him? What if he was the step father like the case in 2009 in South America of the nine year old , 90 pound girl nine months pregnet with TWINS? P.S. When is a human being a human being? Is the bible always correct?

  • JustAthoughtt

    Well said!

    Humans said that “Blacks” weren’t “REAL” Humans… they then felt justified in their unjustifiable actions…

    Humans say that the “unborn” aren’t “REAL” Humans… so they can feel justified in their unjustifiable actions…

    There was a day when Americans were proud to say I own slaves…

    But now the great majority of Americans would be embarrassed to even be related to someone who made such a claim…

    Today Americans are proud to say: “I AM PRO CHOICE!” they see the unborn as objects…

    O how I can’t wait for the day when Americans are embarrassed that they ever supported such an act of selfish violence.

  • JustAthoughtt

    If my teenage daughter were raped I would… Love her!

    I would love and console my daughter letting her know how special she is to me and how much I love her and how wrong it was for this man to ever do such a thing!
    I would assist the police in catching the rapist, and I would ask that the courts punish him accordingly.
    I would forgive him of his actions, but still seek justice and punishment for them!

    I would not throw my daughter away bc she is now tainted and the victim of a violent act of rape…
    Her value is not dependent upon how others see her or treat her… No, she is much much more than that!

    Likewise, and this is so often overlooked, I would not throw away the unborn child that is now tainted and the product of a violent act of rape…

    The key thing here is that a person’s value is not in how they were conceived, it is in the fact that they were conceived! A life is a life!

  • JustAthoughtt

    Here is your statement in a different light:

    If you really want to end obesity then I assume you lecture every man on veganism.

    Do you see the problems with this…

    Your statement at face value makes no sense… Maybe you could clarify…
    1) “If you are serious about ending the need for abortion, I assume you lecture every man you see about staying virginal”

    -Someone can be very serious about ending abortion and yet be pro sexually active men…
    -There are also people who are against abortion who are pro adoption.
    -Also, why would you lecture every man but not every woman?

    2) “Otherwise you are exhibiting rank hypocrisy”

    Lets start with the basics…

    -Hypocrisy: The practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one’s own behavior does not conform.
    -It is not hypocritical to be against abortion but for “men” engaging in sex with women…

  • JustAthoughtt

    If you are speaking from a scientific standpoint… The primary purpose for sex is offspring.

    So to say that you had consensual sex yet you do not consent to having a child is nonsensical.

    Cont. If you are speaking from a scientific standpoint… Then the first stage of a humans life begin at conception.

    Cont. If you are speaking from a scientific standpoint… Then abortion is the killing of a living human in its early stages of life.

    Cont. If you are speaking from a scientific standpoint… Then your body was made for the distinct purpose of nurturing human life during its early stages…

    However, if you are speaking from a self centered, violent, ignorant point of view, then you are right your body is your body…

  • JustAthoughtt

    Yes indeed… Beautifully written… The justification of killing humans in their first stages of life…

    Almost as beautifully written as Hitler’s work on the killing of the Jews… Bravo indeed

  • SaintJoshIII

    “My mother, a secretary in a maternity ward, used to tell me stories about women dying from complicated pregnancies because they were told that it was a sin to have an abortion, even if it meant saving their lives.”

    While women dying from pregnancy is very sad, it does not justify terminating the life of the woman’s child for the sake of the woman’s comfort or safety. One life is no more valuable to Jesus than the next; we are all equally valuable. Therefore, this is a very flawed conclusion. Abortion can’t be justified simply because it benefits the mother.

    “Our sacred texts and traditions teach us that women have the right to take care of their bodies.”

    It is true that Christians are supposed to take care of their bodies, but it’s also true that abortion concerns more than just the woman’s body; the unborn baby’s body must also be of concern. The author failed to take this into consideration, which is why their conclusion is still flawed.

    “It seems like every day lawmakers are trying to limit access to care, putting women’s health at risk.”

    While it’s true that there are some scenarios where an abortion may be in the mother’s best interests health-wise, they’re still not in the child’s best interest. Considering the life and well-being of the woman while ignoring the life and well-being of the woman’s unborn child is blatant hypocrisy.

    “The bottom line is that women must be treated with dignity and receive the best medical care possible.”

    Yes, women should have access to quality medical care, but so should their children. This one basic fact has been ignored by the author throughout this article. Again, there’s more at stake in an abortion scenario than the woman’s health.

    “Unfortunately, the rhetoric of the public abortion debate overlooks the fact that a woman is capable of making decisions for herself.”

    This statement does nothing to demonstrate why abortion is moral and consistent with Christian values. A woman’s ability to make decisions doesn’t tell us anything abo

  • TonyDiaz999

    “One life is no more valuable to Jesus than the next; we are all equally valuable.”

    There are victims of calamities, many of them are praying, fearing Christians.

    If god exists, it/she/he is a very callous SOB.

    An entity CANNOT be loving and omipotent. Victims of calamities and their loved ones tell us that a loving god CANNOT exist.

Read More Articles

shutterstock_185995553
How to Debate Christians: Five Ways to Behave and Ten Questions to Answer

Advice for atheists taking on Christian critics.

HIFR
Heaven Hits the Big Screen

How “Heaven is for Real” went from being an unsellable idea to a bestselling book and the inspiration for a Hollywood movie.

shutterstock_186364295
This God’s For You: Jesus and the Good News of Beer

How Jesus partied with a purpose.

egg.jpg
Jesus, Bunnies, and Colored Eggs: An Explanation of Holy Week and Easter

So, Easter is a one-day celebration of Jesus rising from the dead and turning into a bunny, right? Not exactly.

shutterstock_186566975
Hey Bart Ehrman, I’m Obsessed with Jesus, Too — But You’ve Got Him All Wrong

Why the debate over Jesus’ divinity matters.

shutterstock_148333673
Friend or Foe? Learning from Judas About Friendship with Jesus

We call Judas a betrayer. Jesus called him “friend.”

shutterstock_53190298
Fundamentalist Arguments Against Fundamentalism

The all-or-nothing approach to the Bible used by skeptics and fundamentalists alike is flawed.

shutterstock_186795503
The Three Most Surprising Things Jesus Said

Think you know Jesus? Some of his sayings may surprise you.

SONY DSC
Dear Evangelicals, Please Reconsider Your Fight Against Gay Rights

A journalist and longtime observer of American religious culture offers some advice to his evangelical friends.

shutterstock_186090179
How Passover Makes the Impossible Possible

When we place ourselves within the story, we can imagine new realities.

This Passover, We’re Standing at an Unparted Red Sea

We need to ask ourselves: What will be the future of the State of Israel — and what will it require of us?

pews
Just As I Am

My childhood conversion to Christianity was only the first of many.

shutterstock_127731035 (1)
Are Single People the Lepers of Today’s Church?

In an age of rising singlehood, many churches are still focused on being family ministry centers.

2337221655_c1671d2e5e_b
Mysterious Tremors

People like me who have mystical experiences may be encountering some unknown Other. What can we learn about what that Other is?

bible
Five Bible Verses You Need to Stop Misusing

That verse you keep quoting? It may not mean what you think it means.

csl_wall_paper
What C.S. Lewis’ Marriage Can Tell Us About the Gay Marriage Controversy

Why “welcome and wanted” is a biblical response to gay and lesbian couples in evangelical churches.