Posted on 02/04/2022 11:36:04 AM PST by CondoleezzaProtege
Back in the 1960s and 70s when the legal debate over abortion was heating up, evangelical Protestants were, to put it as mildly as possible, AWOL...major leaders, publications, and organizations of American evangelicalism forty years ago either openly declared their support for legal abortion, or defended the permissibly of killing the unborn.
In 1968, just five years before Roe v. Wade, Christianity Today held a symposium of evangelical leaders to determine “the conservative or evangelical position within Protestantism” on “the control of human reproduction.” In their joint statement, they concluded that “the performance of an induced abortion” is necessary and permissible under certain circumstances, among which they listed “family welfare, and social responsibility.” “When principles conflict,” they continued, “the preservation of fetal life…may be abandoned to maintain full and secure family life.”
The Southern Baptist convention concurred, calling on members of the denomination in 1971 to “‘work for legislation that will allow the possibility of abortion under such conditions as rape, incest, clear evidence of severe fetal deformity, and carefully ascertained evidence of the likelihood of damage to the emotional, mental, and physical health of the mother.”
In other words, forty-six years ago, the position of America’s largest evangelical and Protestant denomination on abortion, as well as that of America’s leading evangelical publication, was indistinguishable from that of the modern Democratic Party. Only Catholics at this point opposed abortion with any clarity.
I show this because I want readers to realize that it’s not unreasonable to suggest those same evangelicals are inconsistent with Christian history when it comes to much newer bioethical issues like IVF and surrogacy. I find that doubly likely, given the attitude of Catholic ethicists (who got abortion right) to these emerging reproductive technologies.
(Excerpt) Read more at patheos.com ...
Agree. I have friends and family members involved with surrogacy. While I’m happy they are thrilled with the idea of being a parent, all surrogacy and rent a womb positions do is devalue the child into a “thing” to be had. At any cost. Sort of like getting a new expensive toy.
I’m sure they love their children, but if there is so much emphasis on obtaining a child at any cost, that is the end result.
Only [official teaching, but not Catholics] at this point opposed abortion with any clarity.
Similar to homosexuality.
Also, if surrogacy involves IVF, part of the process involves destroying numerous conceived human embryos as the selected one is culled from the “rejects.” Destroyed or frozen as “snowflake babies” they are doomed to be stored in a perpetual state of limbo as a back-up, a commodity, or to be eventually killed by “disposing” of them. It is abortion several times over.
Meanwhile, Catholics have historically fully supported the democrat party of abortion.
Opposition to baby butchering is not “the control of human reproduction”.
Now that’s just plain old fashioned calumny. Joe Scheidler? Catholic. Henry Hyde? Catholic. Phyllis Schlafly? Catholic. Antonin Scalia? Catholic. Do you want me to keep going? The list is a very long one.
Just take a survey of self-identifying Romans.
Abortion is one of the things on the smorgasbord that is chosen or not.
Obviously, some Romans adhere to the majority of what is taught.
Also obvious, there are whole countries where less than half Romans darken the door of a church in a years time, but are counted as Roman members.
Yes and none of these incredibly vital ethical discussions negate the inherent value and worth of children conceived via either method.
Very true.
"Now that’s just plain old fashioned calumny. Joe Scheidler? Catholic. Henry Hyde? Catholic. Phyllis Schlafly? Catholic. Antonin Scalia? Catholic. Do you want me to keep going? The list is a very long one."
It is not calumny in the overall sense, but the posted failed to place the qualifying word, "most" before Catholic, as it is easily substantiated that overall Catholics - such as Rome manifestly considers to be members in life and in death - are quite liberal, and far less conservative than those who most strongly esteem the authority and integrity of Scripture - Catholics who do so included.
Which leaves evangelicals with no excuse except immaturity for not opposing abortion for many years, as well as contraception (and which will not be used in the 1,000 year reign of Christ and thus "Thy Kingdom come, Thy will be done....") which is contrary to design and decree, in principle and in precept. But evangelicals soon became active opponents of abortion, while there is a growing movement against contraception. A little late for sure, and what they younger generations will face much as a result! But as usually, a remnant shall be saved.
Catholic Charity Admits Receiving Money From Biden Administration to Traffic Illegals Across U.S.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.