General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: I think people should, in general, choose not to have abortions [View all]ancianita
(43,410 posts)has something to "lose" over the "moral" issue at hand -- usually it's control, whether moral, social, or even legal.
One moral underpinning of church dogma is that "our bodies are not our own." My answer, then, is: then what the fuck is the purpose of the dogma of "free will"?! Religions simply cannot -- NOT -- have 'it' both ways. If each and every soul is to answer to its creator, then what women do with their bodies and souls does not even come within ANY religion's moral parameters.
A priest told me that embodied spiritual equals are here on earth with free will, and that if it is not written anywhere in the Old or New Testament, then what abortion comes down to is this: women have what he called God's "prior rights" of existence, which include before, during and after fertility years -- the right to decide whether to let a potential other being exist or not, and that women's bodies are not just men's external uteruses.
That Women have souls, spirits, free will and the right to decide who or what goes into or comes out of them. Including new human beings. They can get abortions if they want them. That their decision is between them and their god or the universe. Even an infinitely loving and forgiving God would accept anything they do. That the final battle for spiritual equality will be won when men acknowledge that life from God takes the form of the Holy Spirit working through women. He said that if men can hold that concept of a god working through the Holy Spirit for themselves, they must hold that concept true for all women of any religion or non-religion, as well.
When Christianity and other Jesus-believing religions follow their calling morally, they will follow Jesus' exact words without catechismal spin or excuses -- the heart of his teaching being The Two Great Commandments. I won't quote them here, since I assume everyone knows them.