Editor's Note: Jonathan Dudley is the author of "Broken Words: The Abuse of Science and Faith in American Politics."
By Jonathan Dudley, Special to CNN
Over the course of the 2012 election season, evangelical politicians have put their community’s hard-line opposition to abortion on dramatic display.
Missouri Rep. Todd Akin claimed “legitimate rape” doesn’t result in pregnancy. Indiana Senate candidate Richard Mourdock insisted that “even when life begins in that horrible situation of rape, that it is something that God intended to happen.”
While these statements have understandably provoked outrage, they’ve also reinforced a false assumption, shared by liberals and conservatives alike: that uncompromising opposition to abortion is a timeless feature of evangelical Christianity.
The reality is that what conservative Christians now say is the Bible’s clear teaching on the matter was not a widespread interpretation until the late 20th century.
Opinion: Let's get real about abortions
In 1968, Christianity Today published a special issue on contraception and abortion, encapsulating the consensus among evangelical thinkers at the time. In the leading article, professor Bruce Waltke, of the famously conservative Dallas Theological Seminary, explained the Bible plainly teaches that life begins at birth:
“God does not regard the fetus as a soul, no matter how far gestation has progressed. The Law plainly exacts: 'If a man kills any human life he will be put to death' (Lev. 24:17). But according to Exodus 21:22–24, the destruction of the fetus is not a capital offense… Clearly, then, in contrast to the mother, the fetus is not reckoned as a soul.”
The magazine Christian Life agreed, insisting, “The Bible definitely pinpoints a difference in the value of a fetus and an adult.” And the Southern Baptist Convention passed a 1971 resolution affirming abortion should be legal not only to protect the life of the mother, but to protect her emotional health as well.
Opinion: Why the abortion issue won’t go away
These stalwart evangelical institutions and leaders would be heretics by today’s standards. Yet their positions were mainstream at the time, widely believed by born-again Christians to flow from the unambiguous teaching of Scripture.
Televangelist Jerry Falwell spearheaded the reversal of opinion on abortion in the late 1970s, leading his Moral Majority activist group into close political alliance with Catholic organizations against the sexual revolution.
In contrast to evangelicals, Catholics had mobilized against abortion immediately after Roe v. Wade. Drawing on mid-19th century Church doctrines, organizations like the National Right to Life Committee insisted a right to life exists from the moment of conception.
Follow the CNN Belief Blog on Twitter
As evangelical leaders formed common cause with Catholics on topics like feminism and homosexuality, they began re-interpreting the Bible as teaching the Roman Catholic position on abortion.
Falwell’s first major treatment of the issue, in a 1980 book chapter called, significantly, “The Right to Life,” declared, “The Bible clearly states that life begins at conception… (Abortion) is murder according to the Word of God.”
With the megawatt power of his TV presence and mailing list, Falwell and his allies disseminated these interpretations to evangelicals across America.
CNN’s Belief Blog: The faith angles behind the biggest stories
By 1984, it became clear these efforts had worked. That year, InterVarsity Press published the book Brave New People, which re-stated the 1970 evangelical consensus: abortion was a tough issue and warranted in many circumstances.
An avalanche of protests met the publication, forcing InterVarsity Press to withdraw a book for the first time in its history.
“The heresy of which I appear to be guilty,” the author lamented, “is that I cannot state categorically that human/personal life commences at day one of gestation.... In order to be labeled an evangelical, it is now essential to hold a particular view of the status of the embryo and fetus.”
What the author quickly realized was that the “biblical view on abortion” had dramatically shifted over the course of a mere 15 years, from clearly stating life begins at birth to just as clearly teaching it begins at conception.
During the 2008 presidential election, Purpose Driven Life author Rick Warren demonstrated the depth of this shift when he proclaimed: “The reason I believe life begins at conception is ‘cause the Bible says it.”
It is hard to underestimate the political significance of this reversal. It has required the GOP presidential nominee to switch his views from pro-choice to pro-life to be a viable candidate. It has led conservative Christians to vote for politicians like Akin and Mourdock for an entire generation.
And on November 6, it will lead millions of evangelicals to support Mitt Romney over Barack Obama out of the conviction that the Bible unequivocally forbids abortion.
But before casting their ballots, such evangelicals would benefit from pausing to look back at their own history. In doing so, they might consider the possibility that they aren’t submitting to the dictates of a timeless biblical truth, but instead, to the goals of a well-organized political initiative only a little more than 30 years old.
The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Jonathan Dudley.
What both candidates should say but don't:
ONLY FOR THE NEW MEMBERS OF THIS BLOG:
The reality of se-x, abortion, contraception and STD/HIV 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."
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 professor of pediatrics at the University of California, San Francisco. "They view it as a way to have intimacy without having 's-ex.'" (It should be called the Bill Clinton Syndrome !!)
Obviously, political leaders in both parties, Planned Parenthood, parents, the "stupid part of the USA" and the educational system have failed miserably on many fronts.
The most effective forms of contraception, ranked by "Perfect use":
– (Abstinence, 0% failure rate)
– (Masturbation, mono or mutual, 0% failure rate)
One-month injectable and Implant (both at 0.05 percent)
Vasectomy and IUD (Mirena) (both at 0.1 percent)
The Pill, Three-month injectable, and the Patch (all at 0.3 percent)
Tubal sterilization (at 0.5 percent)
IUD (Copper-T) (0.6 percent)
Periodic abstinence (Post-ovulation) (1.0 percent)
Periodic abstinence (Symptothermal) and Male condom (both at 2.0 percent)
Periodic abstinence (Ovulation method) (3.0 percent)
Every other method ranks below these, including Withdrawal (4.0), Female condom (5.0), Diaphragm (6.0), Periodic abstinence (calendar) (9.0), the Sponge (9.0-20.0, depending on whether the woman using it has had a child in the past), Cervical cap (9.0-26.0, with the same caveat as the Sponge), and Spermicides (18.0).
Using abortion as birth control? DON"T take me to your leader.
Regarding abortion and faith – no one with faith can reconcile a pro-abortion on-demand stance with these 2 simple verses:
1) "When Elizabeth heard Mary’s greeting, the baby leaped in her womb, and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit." Luke 1:41.
2) "Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee, and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee." Jeremiah 1:5.
Notice that neither verse is followed by – "so the expectant mom exercised her choice and hastened to the local abortionist."
So you're letting 2000-year-old legends guide your life today? You're right up to date, Bob. Way to go!
I'm sorry Bob, but when we discuss a topic on science, we use science information, facts, theories, etc. We don't use religious idiocy.
You have failed. Again.
You said, "Regarding abortion and faith – no one with faith can reconcile a pro-abortion on-demand stance with these 2 simple verses: ..."
If you think that your imaginary friend doesn't want you to have an abortion, by all means, don't have one. But your delusions have no place in a medical discussion outside of your doctor's office.
Actually, Bob, your nasty sky fairy demands a lot of murdering, despite your delicate quote picking to try to show otherwise. Seems really a very pro-death, pro-torture, and pro-slavery sky fairy, that Christian "god". Let's look at some other choice quotes from the Christian book of nasty AKA the bible:
17 Now kiII all the boys. And kiII every woman who has slept with a man,
18 but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.
Deuteronomy 13:6 – “If your brother, your mother’s son or your son or daughter, or the wife you cherish, or your friend who is as your own soul entice you secretly, saying, let us go and serve other gods … you shall surely kill him; your hand shall be first against him to put him to death”
Revelations 2:23 And I will kill her children with death; and all the churches shall know that I am he which searcheth the reins and hearts: and I will give unto every one of you according to your works.
Note that the bible is also very clear that you should sacrifice and burn an animal today because the smell makes sicko Christian sky fairy happy. No, you don't get to use the parts for food. You burn them, a complete waste of the poor animal.
Yes, the bible really says that, everyone. Yes, it's in Leviticus, look it up. Yes, Jesus purportedly said that the OT commands still apply. No exceptions. But even if you think the OT was god's mistaken first go around, you have to ask why a perfect, loving enti-ty would ever put such horrid instructions in there. If you think rationally at all, that is.
And then, if you disagree with my interpretation, ask yourself how it is that your "god" couldn't come up with a better way to communicate than a book that is so readily subject to so many interpretations and to being taken "out of context", and has so many mistakes in it. Pretty pathetic god that you've made for yourself.
So get out your sacrificial knife or your nasty sky creature will torture you eternally. Or just take a closer look at your foolish supersti-tions, understand that they are just silly, and toss them into the dustbin with all the rest of the gods that man has created.
Ask the questions. Break the chains. Join the movement. Be free of Christianity and other superstitions.
You can have your opinion but your sky wizard has no bearing on our laws and freedom. Your sky wizard has about as much bearing on freedom as a dead turd. You wantg to worship the turd..more power to you.
Actually Christianity has been opposed to abortion since for millenia. The Didache written in the first century clearly condemns abortion and one of the things that set Christians apart in the Greco-Roman world was that they didn't have abortions.
How did they perform abortions in thes days?
Sorry, those days.
Abortions were performed in ancient rome and greece. Some believe that the Hippocratic Oath was developed to prevent Greek Physicians from performing abortions.
What is your evidence for the Hippocratic oath being a response to abortion?
heubert, research the hippocratic corpus which are a collection of writings/teachings associated with Hippocrates.
Didn't the Hippocratic Oath also prohibit performing surgery?
The issue will never go away as long as both sides have financial incentive to keep it going.
Both sides use it as a reliable fundraising line. There a re probably thousnads of jobs at stake as full-time activists.
If people would concentrate on reducing the issues that cause women to make that choice (lack of Jobs, Health Care, Child Care, other support services the Antis are also seeking to eliminate/reduce) there could be real progress to REDUCE the numbers.
As for most folks, we may not like it, but we also do not think it right to use legislation to take away other folks choice.
Pushing it back into back alleys by making it illegal is not the answer.
Was the Big O an abortion survivor? Is that why it's so hard to prove he qualified?
The libby's say a child has to have a SS number before being expelled from a hospital. Does the Big O have a valid one? Back alley doctors don't give them out.
Why are we so mad about abortions? I mean come on god is the original series killer.
Be afraid of my bark.
All you christ ians that want christo sharia and bibble babble to run our country I shi te upon thee for trying to take us back thousands of years! We live in an Age of Reason and you desire the unreasonable. WE ALREADY DECIDED WHAT IS CONSTI TUTIONAL, you just want to bankrupt us.
And btw Hand of GLod, you got a lotta hubris thinking you speak for the Great Unknowable- pride much? By YOUR OWN STANDARDS you will burn in eternity and be shi te upon by the hind of The Load GOd yahwayawayawayaway, oh yahway oh yah...
@The Mighty Hind of God Will Shi teThee
Ha ha haha funny handle! The Load God will shi te thee? Ha! Great!
Great song too;
Ya way away away yaway, ya a way ya a.... ya way yaway yaway yaway, ya wa ay ya way! Love it here in Scotland! Gonna sing that at the next football match! Hilarious mate!
This article is full of factual hubris. Great that CNN lets its commentators make up history and run with lies.
Please pinpoint the "lies". Thanks.
Here Calvin, I can see you have a problem with reading comprehension so i'll give you the short version:
Some evangelicals in the 1960's had a different view of abortion. That changed in the 1970's. Now evangelicals want you to believe they have always held the exact same understanding of abortion, but that is a lie.
I hope that helped clear up your "missed-conceptions" (pun intended...)
I just found out I am pregnant last week and have been thinking about whether or not I should get an abortion.... This article convinced me that I SHOULD get an abortion. Just scheduled it! Thank you CNN!!!
So you will kill your innocent baby based on an article written by someone you know nothing about? Hell was designed for people like you.
Thank you Jenny, for showing everyone that you are either a liar or a moron, though i'll bet it's the former. If you base such a major decision on a CNN special contributor article then you are a moron, but more likely you are lying to attempt to make some greater point, of which I fail to see in your comment so I am not sure why you would lie without adding your 2 cents on whether you think its right or not.
Just because it is legal to kill the innocent doesn't make it right or moral. It was legal to kill jews in nazi Germany also, but the whole world recognized it as wrong. Killing babies is just as wrong. We need to overturn Roe v. Wade, and we will have that chance if Romney is elected because the deciding vote will be appointed to the Supreme Court during his presidency. This is why it is so important for people of conscience to vote.
Single issue voters like you have no business telling others what to do. Shallowness of thought and dogmatic idiocy don't make for rational voting.
I'm not a single issue voter. There are numerous moral issues that I care about, and Romney seems to be on my side on most of them.
Just read my name ism, sharia ism hatred of america ism, religionism anti american ism, hatred ism of freedomism, forgetting ism that this ism was tackled 40 years ago ism and decided Consti tutionally ism showing hatred of Const itutionism among chrsitard faithless hated of America ism, attack ism its inst itutions ism, religionism hatred of America ism. Abortion decided already by scholars, doctors, judges, Const itutionism, why go backward ism except cuz of hatred of America ism. bible work of anti-american ism and support hitler and slavism. please kill yerselves and go to your heavenism if its so greatism what about protecting womenism from all of your undemocratic religionism...?
Romney is on whatever side will get him elected. When he was governor he legislated fairly liberal. He is not a consistent person, nor is he moral, or caring of people not like him. The wrongness of abortion and R v W is also merely an opinion of yours. The law is clear, and Romney knows this. Roe v Wade will not be overturned, but it's a lovely talking point to rally the self-righteous, which is what it's been used for since it's been ruled on.
Think George W. Bush, he supposedly hated Roe v Wade, and was a staunch anti-abortionist. He also appointed enough conservative justices to the Supreme Court that tipped it to a majority conservative, and nothing happened for the 8 years he was in there.
" I'm not a single issue voter. There are numerous moral issues that I care about, and Romney seems to be on my side on most of them."
I guess that's why you chose to believe in an invisible magical sky daddy who exists for the sole purpose of creating billions of people just to kill them and torture them for all eternity.
"We need to overturn Roe v. Wade, and we will have that chance if Romney is elected because the deciding vote will be appointed to the Supreme Court during his presidency"
From 2000 to 2006 you wacky fundiot nutters had the perfect storm. The religious right (oxymoron) owned the White House, Senate, House, and Supreme Court. Yet they did nothing to ban abortion or overturn Roe.
And none of you ignorant fundiot nutters can figure out why? You are being played. They use this issue to string you along. To keep you voting for these cretins. But they won't come out and ban abortion. Because they'd lose you for future elections.
“We need to overturn Roe v. Wade, and we will have that chance if Romney is elected because the deciding vote will be appointed to the Supreme Court during his presidency.”
The republicans will never do anything to reverse Roe V. Wade. As long as Roe stands the republicans are guaranteed an army of evangelical slaves who will vote republican no matter how big a piece of crap their candidate is. Overturn Roe and their army of slaves might start to vote against all of the other amazingly stupid things republican candidates want to do
What does the bible say about abortion?
Depends. If you take abortion as an actual medical procedure, then absolutely nothing. If you take it as killing a fetus while in the womb, then it's ok if you're taking over a city that refused to convert, as well as killing all cattle, men, women, young men. Just keep those nubile virgins for yourself though.
Here James, America's Best Christian explains what the bible says about abortion...
Prayer changes things .
faithless hatred of americaism, wanto go backwardism waste resourceism, gut america ism, prayer changes intelligenceism to stupidity ism, hater of america ism...go back to caveism and worship dark lordism of superst itionism, freakism, want shariaism.
Teach science in CHURCH to maintain tax exemptism....teach ethics and morals at homeism, take hand in correct upbringing of intelligent childrenism, no religionism /alcoholism to destroy minds ism, sicko sanduskyism
Prayer changes things .
See below postism and see above postism you anti american christardist ism hater of America best country in history of humans ism
"Ronald Regonzo" who degenerates to:
"Salvatore" degenerates to:
"Douglas" degenerates to:
"truth be told" degenerates to:
"Thinker23" degenerates to:
"Atheism is not healthy ..." degenerates to:
"another repentant sinner" degenerates to:
"Dodney Rangerfield" degenerates to:
"tina" degenerates to:
"captain america" degenerates to:
"Atheist Hunter" degenerates to:
"Anybody know how to read? " degenerates to:
"just sayin" degenerates to:
"ImLook'nUp" degenerates to:
"Kindness" degenerates to:
"Chad" degenerates to
"Bob" degenerates to
"nope" degenerates to:
"2357" degenerates to:
"WOW" degenerates to:
"fred" degenerates to:
"!" degenerates to:
This troll is not a christian.`
Prayer does not; you are such a LIAR. You have NO proof it changes anything! A great example of prayer proven not to work is the Christians in jail because prayer didn't work and their children died. For example: Susan Grady, who relied on prayer to heal her son. Nine-year-old Aaron Grady died and Susan Grady was arrested.
An article in the Journal of Pediatrics examined the deaths of 172 children from families who relied upon faith healing from 1975 to 1995. They concluded that four out of five ill children, who died under the care of faith healers or being left to prayer only, would most likely have survived if they had received medical care.
The statistical studies from the nineteenth century and the three CCU studies on prayer are quite consistent with the fact that humanity is wasting a huge amount of time on a procedure that simply doesn’t work. Nonetheless, faith in prayer is so pervasive and deeply rooted, you can be sure believers will continue to devise future studies in a desperate effort to confirm their beliefs._
The weird part of this to me is the alignment of evangelical Christians and Roman Catholics. Those two groups have spent the last four centuries killing each other. America was founded in part to escape Catholic and Anglican religious dominion. Now they're sudden best friends? Weird!
It's because they now have a common enemy, the rational people who see them for the naked Emperor's they are.
Who goes gaga over English Royalty and then invented their own goofball dynasty clan, the mobster Kennedy's? Now yer hopey changey guy really disses the Brits? Circular, circular, what a circle church god the libby's have.
I may not know how to read, but I do know how to write. One never uses an apostrophe to form a plural.
Dippity doo doo, neva saih neva. from Dipster:'............One never uses an apostrophe to form a plural.' One might not but many do. from other sources:'..................When forming the plural of words and hyphenated phrases that aren’t nouns but are used as nouns sometimes you do and sometimes you don’t:BUT
I’m tired of all his maybe’s............DO use the apostrophe to form the plural of lowercase letters:
Mind your p’s and q’s.....' Last I heard da kennidies were case sensitive and needed lotsa help frum attorneys.
How bout that friendly looking guy in the picture, eh? Yeah, that's my role model, hate-filled white men trying to force their uneducated, narrow beliefs on the rest of the country.
He looks like Jerry Sandusky, which would be apropos in the sense that religion IS child abuse. Teaching kids superst ition as fact is child abuse, pure and simple. Religion is as damaging to forming minds as is alcohol- and should be regulated as such! No religious teaching until adulthood when people can make rational decisions. Seems fair to me!
A Word for All of Us.
It has been drawn to my attention that the path of Hurricane Sandy made the shape of the Hebrew Letter LAMED, ל I find that most interesting as this letter in Hebrew means to learn, it also speaks of the King of Kings. This very strongly indicates to me that the King of Kings is not only telling us something but He is teaching us how He feels about what is happening in the United States of America.
When I first noticed the path of the storm Sandy looked like Lamed, I stopped and begin to pray over this, and during prayer and asking God what did this mean, I heard in my spirit that small still voice that speaks to those who know His Voice.
"This is the beginning of Great Sorrows for the Churches have fornicated with other gods and have offered up prayers that are a stench to my nostrils. Those who have called themselves people of God have deceived the people and fed their own bellies with unclean foods of greed and spiritual pride. No man can save them now, for those who know me and I them must know My Word is the Beginning and the End of all things, now it must rain on the just and the unjust alike. There is still time for repentance for those who have sinned against Me, but Judgment now will fall on the Nations who have come against Jerusalem and My people.
As for Jerusalem I say to you, I will cleanse my house first, fall on your faces and repent before it is too late. You have invited horrible sins into My House and the time for cleansing has come near.
END of MESSAGE
Why did Sandy continue on into Canada if it was meant to teach the US about fornicating churches or whatever you said? Are the death and destruction a sign of similar problems abroad?
WOW! The batshit crazy fundiot woo is strong with this fucking nutter!
WOW! Yer stoopid!
But first a word on the bible and abortion. God, in the OT, doesn't give a value to a human life until it's ONE MONTH old. At which point it's either worth 5 shekels (boy) or 3 shekels (girl). Hey, girls are like blacks were when our country was founded, ie worth 3/5's of a person. Huh, go figure.
Here's my source for biblical abortion information....
Yeah, and I have a piece of toast with Jeebus's picture on it. And my dog's turds look like candy bars. So fucking what?
Off the bat in your sixth paragraph you woefully misinterpreted what the text in Exodus is saying so using that text to support your argument to say the fetus is not reckoned as a soul then you are wrong. The verses are as follows:
22 “If people are fighting and hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely[a] but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman’s husband demands(A) and the court allows. 23 But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life,(B) 24 eye for eye, tooth for tooth,(C) hand for hand, foot for foot,"
If there is no serious injury to mother or child the offended was to be fined regardless.
If there was injury or loss of life of either the mother or child that's when Capital punishment or eye for an eye, foot for a foot, etc. etc. comes into play. In other words if the mother died then the offender would pay with his/her life and if the baby died the offender would pay with his/her life. If a limb was lost the offender would lose a limb, etc. ect.
The only reason the Bible used a pregnant woman was to show exactly what you are trying to disprove which is that the unborn is equal to the mother. Otherwise the Bible would just have said if two people are fighting and harm a woman and there was no serious injury he/she would be fined and if the woman was killed or lost a limb then the offender would pay with life or limb equivalently.
How can you be so certain?
You can't be certain, but that is the most logical explanation. Otherwise why would you use a pregnant woman in the example?
Meh. It’s an explanation, but I wouldn’t say it’s the most logical.
Then why use a pregnant woman in the example?
I don’t know because I didn’t write it. You’d have to ask the men that did, but to jump to that conclusion based solely on the text provided would require a giant leap of logic (even by christian standards).
I have read other versions of the passage and they corroborated this interpretation. Where is the logic faulty? What information, besides the text, should we consider?
Nowhere in that verse does it say that that an unborn child is in anyway equivalent to the woman or any other human for that matter. Nowhere! You may draw that conclusion if you wish, but the verse could just as easily have used a child,a neighbor or any other human as the subject, and that’s not even what I’m disputing. The fact that Chelm says the reason the bible used a pregnant woman was to show equivalency is what I’m disputing. He doesn’t know any more than any other person on this board what the motivations were of the men who wrote the verses in the bible.
I don’t know because I didn’t write it. You’d have to ask the men that did,
The thing about the OT is... it's not JUST a Christian book. And it was not FIRST a Christian book. And the people to whom it is and was holy scripture before Christianity – their belief system and religion still exists. And they have a history of scriptural interpretation, some of it even predating the beginnings of Christianity.
And THEY say that life begins at first breath. Not a conception. And they say that the life of the mother and her health – the life and health the person HERE – is paramount.
If you took the time to talk to a rabbi, ANY rabbi, you'd know that.
You are confused. They are talking injury to the MOTHER, not the fetus. The fetus was not considered to be a person.
What this shows is that the religious reich is not above contradicting themselves and the bible when telling their lies to inflict their sick, twisted views upon everyone else.
If they would practice what they preach among themselves and leave the rational among us alone, there would be no problem. But they are incapable of doing that.
One point to consider: free abortion and birth c0ntrol for all only makes women into s3x objects not the human beings that they are. If both men AND women are held accountable for the natural consequence of s3x, then everyone will be better off, especially the women
My government paid for my vasectomy a few years back.
How does that kind of free birth control objectify women?
Have you stopped for a moment to consider that birth control empowers women by giving them control over their s.ex lives instead of relegating them to being incubators?
Birth control has allowed women to shake off the old religious indoctrination that said that intercourse is the price women had to pay for the privilege of motherhood. It is the Bible that command women to submit to men.
What utter nonsense, "soldier." The ability to control one's own fertility liberates women from being enslaved by their reproductive system. You are the one objectifying women, by implying that they are unable to make such decisions for themselves. Your lack of respect for women is obvious and offensive, but indeed it is your choice.
The fundies said exactly the same thing about legalizing abortion and contraception 50 years ago
I love how to some people "being a mother" means "enslaved by their reproductive system". I feel sorry for all you people with mothers that gave you the impression that you were just s slave driver and not a gift worthy of actual love and care.
Speak for yourself, Bob. That fat head of yours probably didn't result in happiness for your dad either, not just your mother.
Bob #1, when you are not ready, willing, financially/emotionally prepared to be a mother then you are enslaved to the burdon of motherhood. The availability of BC allows females to control when and with whom they have children. I have a friend who came to the US from a 3rd world county by her husband not speaking english. She had to fight him to be allowed to learn to speak english, she had to fight him for the right to use BC, she had to fight him for the right to work.... He told her not to worry about BC cause he will just take care of her. To me that sounds like a slave. Instead, she found a Clinic with someone who spoke her language and explained BC to her, help her obtain it. She didnt' get to choose when she had her first child cause she got pregnant as soon as he brought her over, but she was able to choose when she had her second child. She learned English, got the first job she could and is now a highly repected Senior manager and a US citizen. With two beautiful children (one who just started College this year) Imagine what her life would be like if she never used BC.
Oh BTW, her career saved their tails when her husband got seriously injured on his 4-wheeler wrecked. He couldn't work for nearly 2 years and had huge medical and OT bills. It was her job that saved them from the streets. They would have been SOL if she was a non-english speaking, 7 kids, house wife.
I should apologize to my mom for enslaving her. Maybe to my grandmothers by proxy. Thanks for brining that up, Talullah.
The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.