"Forty-three percent oppose abortion, though most of those believe there should be exceptions in the cases of rape, incest, or when the pregnancy posed a grave threat to the life of the mother. A total of 9% said they “always oppose” abortion."
Well...It sounds like there's at least 9% of the people polled here, that understand the phrase, "THOU SHALT NOT KILL". I think it even made it to the commandment stage...
Well...It sounds like there's at least 9% of the people polled here, that understand the phrase, "THOU SHALT NOT KILL". I think it even made it to the commandment stage...
So "Thou shalt not kill" only applies in regards to the baby, not the mother?
I remember a New Testament parable about a man who crossed to the other side of the road rather than aid an injured Samaritan who was 'unclean'. The implied criticism of this man was about his attitude of justifying cruel indifference in the name of purity, but my point in bringing it up is that it shows the importance the Bible placed on basic human decency, aiding the injured, and the sanctity of ALL life. It doesn't place the unborn on a higher pedestal above the mother. So I find it a bit odd to always assume that in a situation where "the pregnancy posed a grave threat to the life of the mother" (physical, not emotional or mental or social 'threats') that the baby's life (in situations where the baby's survival odds are lower than the mother's) must be automatically saved at the expense of the mother's life.
For those who don't believe in the New Testament but do believe in the Old Testament, there is also a passage that prescribes the penalty of death for someone who kills a woman, or kills a child, but a less severe penalty for someone who injures but doesn't kill a woman while causing her to lose her baby. Hence in the very rare case where the mom's physical life is in danger, I'm not going to blanket trash her and her family as 'murderers' and breakers of the Ten Commandments for a deeply-weighed and difficult decision.