Notes From The Didache On The Early Christian View Of Abortion

[CLAX1911]

That's just silly.

So you can't answer yet another question? Send pretty simple to me.

 

[Gordy327]

So you can't answer yet another question? Send pretty simple to me.

Because your question comes from a false premise and is just stupid to begin with.

 

[Gordy327]

And they can vote their values and if you perceive it as some sort of religious viewpoint then that's your problem.

You've already said that and it was addressed. I fail to why you have a need to repeat yourself.

I don't think that's possible in a country with so many religious people. Unless you create a class that cannot vote because of the religious affiliation.

It's possible as long as the Constitution is adhered to.

Seems about equal

It's called the majority. If you don't want to live in a majority Christian Nation perhaps it's time to find somewhere else. Or make an effort to forbid the religious people from voting.

We do not have tyranny of the minority by the majority. Vote however irrationally you want. But if something conflicts with the constitution, expect legal challenges.

 

[CLAX1911]

Because your question comes from a false premise and is just stupid to begin with.

Cope

 

[CLAX1911]

You've already said that and it was addressed.

So deal with it.

I fail to why you have a need to repeat yourself.

emphasis.

It's possible as long as the Constitution is adhered to.

It is. Restriction on abortion doesn't force you to adhere to any religious view point

We do not have tyranny of the minority by the majority. Vote however irrationally you want. But if something conflicts with the constitution, expect legal challenges.

Have fun challenging it.

 

[Gordy327]

Cope

No need. I simply dismiss it.

So deal with it.

See previousn statement.

emphasis.

Unnecessary

It is. Restriction on abortion doesn't force you to adhere to any religious view point

THere's no rational or legal reason for abortion restrictions at all.

Have fun challenging it.

No need. Others likely pick up that mantle.

 

[CLAX1911]

No need. I simply dismiss it.

See previousn statement.

Unnecessary

THere's no rational or legal reason for abortion restrictions at all.

Appeal to the voters than.

No need. Others likely pick up that mantle.

 

[Gordy327]

Appeal to the voters than.

Legal challenged to unconstitutional laws will suffice.

 

[CLAX1911]

Legal challenged to unconstitutional laws will suffice.

Again Abortion being restricted doesn't violate the constitution.

 

[Gordy327]

Again Abortion being restricted doesn't violate the constitution.

Again, there is no constitutional basis to restrict abortion. Just the opposite really.

 

[CLAX1911]

Again, there is no constitutional basis to restrict abortion. Just the opposite really.

But there's no constitutional basis to not restrict it.

 

[Gordy327]

But there's no constitutional basis to not restrict it.

Sure there is.

 

[CLAX1911]

Sure there is.

Show.

 

[Gordy327]

4th, 5th, 13th, & 14th Amendments: bodily autonomy, due process, servitude, and personhood

 

[CLAX1911]

4th, 5th, 13th, & 14th Amendments: bodily autonomy, due process, servitude, and personhood

None of those women mentioned abortion. Try again

 

[Lursa]

It is murder. I thought I made that clear.

Your OP wasnt about murder...why are you still discussing it? How about focusing on what you have "claimed" it's about...if it's wrong.

My topic stands as to why abortion is wrong.

What if people that dont believe in your Bible...or for their personal reasons...also dont believe it's murder or wrong? Here it is again:

If they dont think it's wrong, why should they be concerned either way? There is a much safer medical procedure that woman can have that enables them to keep working, continuing their education, not being sick and in pain, not requiring them to go on public assistance to pay the rent or feed their families, risking their lives over 9 months, etc.​

I'm politely and directly addressing what you stated. Can you debate it or not?

 

[Gordy327]

None of those women mentioned abortion. Try again

They do mention autonomy, due process, and personhood, which women have and the unborn do not. Abortion restrictions violate all those.

 

[CLAX1911]

They do mention autonomy,

How does being pregnant take away autonomy

due process, and personhood, which women have and the unborn do not. Abortion restrictions violate all those.

 

[Gordy327]

How does being pregnant take away autonomy

I specifically said abortion restrictions takes away autonomy, not pregnancy.

 

[CLAX1911]

I specifically said abortion restrictions takes away autonomy, not pregnancy.

How do they take away autonomy?

 

[weaver2]

This forum is for discussion of abortion. Not the law or it would be more appropriate in Law & Order forum. My topic stands as to why abortion is wrong.

No dispute there, but voting to enforce your religious views on others is not really in keeping with American values of respect, freedom, and separation of church and state. So voters who vote as you described are disrespecting American values in favor of religious ones. They should consider instead moving to a religious authoritarian state like Iran or a secluded enclave like Warren Jeffs or Orthodox Jews.

Many in today’s churches whistle past the graveyard when it comes to abortion.

It is clear here that yes, God does abhor abortion.

————————

“The Didache is in two or three parts. The first part draws heavily from the gospels and follows the “two-ways” ethical tradition of Proverbs and the Psalms. It quotes and elaborates subtly upon the Sermon on the Mount, which elaborations (e.g., substituting “fasting” for blessing one’s enemies) seem to locate it more in the 2nd century than the first. The second part of the work is a fairly detailed account of the early Christian practice of baptism (by effusion) and the Lord’s Supper. The Didache knows nothing of transubstantiation or a memorial eucharistic sacrifice. The third part is a brief apocalyptic section. Naturally, there is much discussion among scholars about the source criticism and how to relate the three aspects of the document to each other.”

“Yesterday, in class, as we worked through chapter 2 I was struck by this portion of 2:2: “You shall not murder a child in destruction nor shall you kill one just born” (οὐ φονεύσεις τέκνον ἐν φθορᾷ οὐδὲ γεννηθέντα ἀποκτενεῖς). Michael Holmes, in his excellent edition of the Apostolic Fathers (3rd edition) translates these clauses, “you shall not abort a child or commit infanticide.” This seems perfect.”

Notes From The Didache On The Early Christian View Of Abortion - The Heidelblog

One of the more difficult and fascinating texts in the collection of texts known as the Apostolic Fathers is the Teaching of the Lord to the Gentiles by the Twelve Apostles usually known as a the Didache (Διδαχὴ). It is difficult because there are genuine questions as to its original…

heidelblog.net

There are no links to verses that support banning abortion. There aren't even any verses that deal with abortion directly. If there are post them. The Didache is not the Bible.

 

[RaleBulgarian]

Many in today’s churches whistle past the graveyard when it comes to abortion.

It is clear here that yes, God does abhor abortion.

————————

“The Didache is in two or three parts. The first part draws heavily from the gospels and follows the “two-ways” ethical tradition of Proverbs and the Psalms. It quotes and elaborates subtly upon the Sermon on the Mount, which elaborations (e.g., substituting “fasting” for blessing one’s enemies) seem to locate it more in the 2nd century than the first. The second part of the work is a fairly detailed account of the early Christian practice of baptism (by effusion) and the Lord’s Supper. The Didache knows nothing of transubstantiation or a memorial eucharistic sacrifice. The third part is a brief apocalyptic section. Naturally, there is much discussion among scholars about the source criticism and how to relate the three aspects of the document to each other.”

“Yesterday, in class, as we worked through chapter 2 I was struck by this portion of 2:2: “You shall not murder a child in destruction nor shall you kill one just born” (οὐ φονεύσεις τέκνον ἐν φθορᾷ οὐδὲ γεννηθέντα ἀποκτενεῖς). Michael Holmes, in his excellent edition of the Apostolic Fathers (3rd edition) translates these clauses, “you shall not abort a child or commit infanticide.” This seems perfect.”

Notes From The Didache On The Early Christian View Of Abortion - The Heidelblog

One of the more difficult and fascinating texts in the collection of texts known as the Apostolic Fathers is the Teaching of the Lord to the Gentiles by the Twelve Apostles usually known as a the Didache (Διδαχὴ). It is difficult because there are genuine questions as to its original…

heidelblog.net

Religion has no place in our government. Including in the legislative process.

 

[CLAX1911]

Religion has no place in our government. Including in the legislative process.

You can only gain that by forbidding all the religious people from participating in the process. I'd say that's way more of a violation of the First amendment than someone who mentioning a biblical source as to why they object to abortion.

 

[Gordy327]

You can only gain that by forbidding all the religious people from participating in the process. I'd say that's way more of a violation of the First amendment than someone who mentioning a biblical source as to why they object to abortion.

Religious people can participate. But they can't make law or public policy based on religion.

 

[weaver2]

You can only gain that by forbidding all the religious people from participating in the process. I'd say that's way more of a violation of the First amendment than someone who mentioning a biblical source as to why they object to abortion.

Your dishonesty is overwhelming!! Anti-abortion advocates do not just "mention a biblical source when they object to abortion". They are actively promoting the universal ban of all abortions for almost every reason. Many even ban abortion for children carrying the result of incest rape. And they back up their demand for banning with scurrilous statements about the immorality of women not biblical sources.

Just a thought; when you are accusing women of immoral behavior and getting pregnant have you ever wondered about how she got pregnant and the morality of the man that impregnated her, ever? You do know that it takes two people?How come men are never mentioned in your attacks on women's abortions?