Using Divine Command Theory Metaetchics I will attempt to explain my moral reasoning on Abortion. It is a topic that is heavily felt and discussed at a minimum in most cases due to difference of opinions. As a Christian in today’s world being raised in what they call the Bible belt, I will compare my views and moral thoughts on this matter as I glance into the different verses, thoughts and views while using examples of different theory’s through readings relating to the issue. This is a controversial topic that I have always seen both ways, but always stood my ground per say with my own moral viewpoints on this, which is I firmly believe that Abortion is wrong. What humans do morally, when they have their own standards and way of doing things is often influenced by others in determining what is right and what is wrong according to their insight of Moral Realism is and according to the Diving Command Theory.
Even though I grew up in what is known as the “Bible Belt”, in a Pentecostal congregation through childhood and teen years, I married a Methodist and became a member of their congregation. Not getting into the aspects of the difference of religious views, both are pretty much on the same page when it comes to Abortion as in most religious aspects of the topic of Abortion. It is never right in any manner to physically take the life of a human. Whether the child has not been born or after birth. Taking the life of a fetus is murder just as it is if the fetus was outside the body. Just because they use what is called methods and procedures doesn’t necessarily justify the fact that it is killing a human. While the human isn’t formed completely and is growing and developing while being nurtured by the human female, it is a life. Once it reaches a certain stage of development and in some cases, it doesn’t it is still birthed by the female and at that moment, it’s first breath of air is taken. Some will argue that that is the moment that life is brought forth despite the fact that it generally takes 9 months for this to happen, the birth is the moment of life, not at the moment of conception therefore the thought of abortion is supposedly considered to be right when performed.
Divine Command Theory (also known as theological voluntarism) is a metaethical theory which proposes that an action’s status as morally good is equivalent to whether it is commanded by God. The phrase ‘innocent blood’ occurs about 20 times in the Bible. The context is always one of condemning those who shed this blood or warning people not to shed it. Innocent blood includes the blood of children (Psalm 106:38). Jeremiah puts it in a context with refugees and widows and orphans: ‘Thus says the Lord: Do justice and righteousness, and deliver from the hand of the oppressor him who has been robbed. And do no wrong or violence to the alien, the fatherless, and the widow, nor shed innocent blood in this place.’ Surely the blood of the unborn is as innocent as any blood that flows in the world. Although the Bible speaks of the issue of Abortion, the word ‘abortion’ is not mentioned in the Bible. For example: Did not he who made me in the womb make them? Did not the same one form us both within our mothers? (Job 31:15) Yet you brought me out of the womb; you made me trust in you even at my mother’s breast. From birth I was cast upon you; from my mother’s womb you have been my God. (Psalm 22:9-10) For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother’s womb. I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; your works are wonderful, I know that full well. My frame was not hidden from you when I was made in the secret place. When I was woven together in the depths of the earth, your eyes saw my unformed body. All the days ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to be. (Psalm 139:13-16) This is what the LORD says—he who made you, who formed you in the womb, and who will help you… (Isaiah 44:2) Listen to me, O house of Jacob, all you who remain of the house of Israel, you whom I have upheld since you were conceived, and have carried since your birth. Even to your old age and gray hairs I am he, I am he who will sustain you. I have made you and I will carry you; I will sustain you and I will rescue you. (Isaiah 46:3-4) And now the LORD says—he who formed me in the womb to be his servant to bring Jacob back to him and gather Israel to himself, for I am honored in the eyes of the LORD and my God has been my strength. (Isaiah 49:5) The word of the LORD came to me, saying, “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.” (Jeremiah 1:4-5) When Elizabeth heard Mary’s greeting, the baby leaped in her womb, and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit. In a loud voice she exclaimed: “Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the child you will bear! As soon as the sound of your greeting reached my ears, the baby in my womb leaped for joy.” (Luke 1:41-42, 44) You shall not murder. (Exodus 20:13) God calls us to protect the defenseless, including children.
When you intentionally take a life, which begins at the time of conception, it is not right in any definition to end that life for the reasons that are used today with no regards to the life itself, the laws of man, the word of the Bible and the fact that a life is a life. There are many reasons that a life ends, it could be a medical issue such as cancer, organ failure or a vehicle accident but intentionally taking a life such as abortion is like shooting someone and getting away with it except the person that got shot has a name, an aborted fetus doesn’t therefore no death certificate is needed whereas a miscarriage or lost of child in some form results in a death certificate with a name, birth weight, parents name, etc. When an abortion is allowed as it is now a days, it doesn’t require any type of identification at all other than what it is named by the format of the way the abortion is handled and discarded of. One of the key themes throughout the Bible and historical Christianity is that we should be concerned about the welfare of the poor, weak, and helpless. Many Scriptures make this very clear. In addition to the previous verses, read James 1:27 to see how the Bible describes religion that is pure and faultless. Although James was not writing about God’s attitude about abortion, the principle is clear: We should be concerned about those who are unable to care for themselves. An unborn child is totally helpless and unable to care for himself or herself. If something goes wrong late in the pregnancy and the fetus dies, we call it “still birth” and, by law, issue a death certificate. So, why is a death certificate not required for the child being aborted? If life begins at the moment of conception, then an aborted baby deserves a name as well. There are so many acknowledgments of what is medically correct to what is morally correct. Gathered from a reading, it states that recognizing this difference, the Supreme Court in Roe v. Wade created the “trimester” system to sort through the legal implications of the constitutional “right to privacy” they said we all have as Americans. The justices ruled that the early and late stages of pregnancy are morally and legally distinct. Early on, in the “first trimester,” the embryo undeniably is human life, but it’s not “a human being” in the normal sense of the term. At this stage of pregnancy, a woman’s right to privacy trumps any responsibility the state might have to protect the embryo by interfering with the woman’s decision to terminate the pregnancy. Late in the pregnancy, certainly by the “third trimester,” however, the child has reached a stage of development that changes its moral and legal status. To protect the rights of the viable fetus, states can put serious limits on a woman’s right to abortion, though they must continue to respect her right to self-defense, to terminate the pregnancy to save her own life or prevent serious injury. In the ambiguous middle of the pregnancy, the “second trimester,” the state has to balance the right to life of the unborn with the right to privacy of the woman, a balance that continues to tip toward the fetus as the pregnancy progresses. In this stage, our constantly improving medical technology plays an important role in the moral-legal equation. Roe doesn’t require “abortion on demand” until the moment of birth. Rather, abortion is illegal in most states once the fetus is viable (normally 24 weeks into the pregnancy), unless it’s necessary to save the life of the mother or prevent serious physical or mental harm. I think the moral reasoning of Roe and subsequent Supreme Court decisions reflects what many of us actually think: the moral status of the fetus changes over the course of the pregnancy. Advances in medical technology affect our opinions about when exactly the line is crossed. But most of us think there’s a difference between a recently fertilized egg and a late-term unborn child. I think that’s true even of many people who consider themselves “pro-life.” It’s implied in their willingness to allow abortion in cases of rape or incest. No one would argue that a mother can kill the child she just bore because it was conceived through rape or incest. If we really think a recently fertilized egg is morally and legally exactly the same as a child recently born, how can we possibly allow these exceptions for abortion? Whatever Mitt Romney’s reason for supporting “personhood” legislation, his argument that abortion is OK in cases of rape and incest implies that he doesn’t really believe that a fertilized egg is morally and legally the same as a born child. I agree with this statement: “I long for a world where unintended pregnancies and abortions are rare, where every woman controls her own sexuality, contraceptives are easily available for those who wish to use them, and couples make reproductive choices responsibly, with mutual respect and love. I respect, though I disagree with the conviction of many Americans that a human being’s life begins at conception. And I share their belief in the sanctity of life. I appreciate the biblical view that a human being’s life begins at birth. But modern science and medical technology give me a more nuanced and conservative conviction. The moral view that underlies Roe v. Wade — that a line is crossed when a fetus becomes “viable” — seems most plausible, morally defensible, and consistent with the spirit of the biblical view.”
My conclusion is that Abortion is wrong, morally and ethically although it is not clearly stated nor defined in the Bible as abortion, its classification is the same as murder to me. When a life is taken it is murder. The Bible clearly states that we are not to murder another human. It’s one of the ten commandments as well. Abortion is not right to me morally nor spiritually. I have always felt that there is other ways to handle things and have been told that I haven’t been in the situation to make that decision but I feel I have just by being a Christian and I will never back away from the knowing in my heart that Abortion is just as wrong to me as it would be for me to take a gun and go randomly take someone’s life and just do away with the body. That’s what happens when an abortion is performed, no name, no identity, just weighed in some cases and throwed in the disposal. That’s how I perceive it after an Abortion is given. A bag of organs laying in a trash can. Therefore, my moral reasoning and Divine theory process has not changed at all on this matter, if nothing, getting into the word more has showed me even more so just how wrong it really is in God’s eyes.
- Jones. Moral Reasoning: An Intentional Approach to Distinguishing Right from Wrong.. [Liberty University Online Bookshelf].