Religion and abortion

To meet Wikipedia's Wikipedia style guidelines, this article or section may require Cleanup.
Please discuss this issue on the , or replace this tag with a Template_messages/Cleanup#Cleanup_.E2.80.94_specific_issues. Editing is available.
This article has been tagged since April 2006.

Religion and abortion are issues that are closely linked. Some religions oppose abortion, and some consider abortion acceptable under limited circumstances. Some atheists are opposed to abortion and some atheists support abortion rights [http://www.atheistsforhumanrights.org/.

Buddhism

Buddha advised against the taking of conscious life, as he identified such activity as a cause of suffering. Buddhism generally asserts that conscious life begins before birth. Therefore, many Buddhists consider abortion to be equivalent to infanticide.

Mizuko kuyo

Mizuko kuyo (水子供養 — lit. "water-child memorial service") is a Japanese memorial service held by or for those who have had a miscarriage, stillbirth, or abortion. This practice has become particularly visible since the 1970s, particularly with the creation of shrines devoted solely to this ritual. Reasons for the performance of these rites can include parental grief, desire to comfort the soul of the fetus, or even fear of retribution from the vengeful spirit. Originally, mizuko kuyo was used to make offerings to Jizo, a Bodhisattva who is believed to protect children. In the Edo period, when famine sometimes lead the poverty-stricken to infanticide and abortion, the practice was adapted to cover these situations as well. Today, the practice of mizuko kuyo continues in Japan, although it is unclear whether it is an authentically Buddhist practice. Specifics of the ceremony vary from temple to temple, school to school, and individual to individual. It is common for temples to offer Jizo statues for a fee, which are then dressed in red bibs and caps, and displayed in the temple yard. Some modern services have come under criticism for allegedly abusing the Japanese belief that the spirits of the dead retaliate for their mistreatment. Page Brookes, Anne. (1981). Mizuko kuyō and Japanese Buddhism.. Japanese Journal of Religious Studies, 8 (3-4), 119–47. Retrieved 2006-04-02. Martin, Elaine. (1996). Rethinking the Practice of Mizuko Kuyo in Contemporary Japan: Interviews with Practitioners at a Buddhist Temple in Tokyo. Retrieved 2006-04-03.

Christianity

Early Christian writers condemned abortion explicitly. There is no known Early Christian text that contains any exceptions under which abortion would be morally permissible.

The Didache, which most scholars consider to be written in the latter 1st century A.D., comments on the commandment, "you shall do nothing to any man that you would not wish to be done to yourself", by saying:

... Commit no murder, adultery, sodomy, fornication, or theft. Practise no magic, sorcery, abortion, or infanticide. ...

In the 2nd century, Tertullian defended Christianity from accusations of practicing human sacrifice by writing,

How can we kill a man when we are those who say that all who use abortifacients are homicides, and will account to God for their abortions as for the killing of men? For the fetus in the womb is not an animal.

By the 3rd century, abortion was commonly listed among the crimes of men, and there are no extant or referenced texts attesting to any exceptions that would make abortion permissible. In the fourth century, Gregory of Nyssa wrote that Christians believe that there is one principle of life from embryo to adulthood (as opposed to two, as assumed in Roman law). In the same century, John Chrysostom denounced married men who encouraged their prostitutes to get abortions, saying,

You do not let a harlot remain only a harlot, but make her a murderess as well.

Early Christians lived under a Roman legal code that permitted both abortion and infanticide. Given the generally ineffective or dangerous methods of abortion available at the time, unwanted children were sometimes carried to term by Roman women, and abandoned to die of exposure. Unlike infanticide, to which the early Christians reacted with intervention and strongly opposed teaching, some believe that it is less certain how the earliest Christians regarded abortion, though all the extant texts imply opposition to abortion. Despite the explicit condemnation of abortion and infanticide (separately mentioned in Didache), some argue that writings against infanticide are sometimes mistaken for anti-abortion teaching. Others believe that these works provide evidence that early Christians saw no difference in principle between abortion and infanticide. The four gospels offer no statements about abortion as such, and offer no new prohibitions.

The Bible does not explicitly condemn abortion in any passage, and consequently passages that relate to pregnancy are often the result of debate among Christians. Exodus 21:22-23 is interpreted under Christian tradition as an unequivocal assertion that the child formed in the womb is a human being, because the Greek version of the Old Testament (Septuagint) translates in such a way as to distinctly state that a life is to be taken in the extreme case of a "life" lost (whereas the Hebrew only explicitly mentions a monetary compensation, if a premature birth is caused by unintentional violence — thus the Jewish view of the issue). The implication is that the fetus can be recognized for what it is, so that damage to it may be assessed. Speculations arose then, concerning whether the child should only be considered a human being after it has been "formed", which led to a diversity of views on the matter. In Deuteronomy 32:23-26, God describes how he will commit genocide against a specific nation. Persons of all ages and both sexes, from infants to old people, will be destroyed. Presumably, fetuses would also be killed during the genocide. But they are not considered sufficiently important to be mentioned. In 2 Kings 15:16, King Menahem rips open all of the pregnant women of Tipsah because they refuse to open the gates of the city; all of the women and fetuses likely died as a result. In Hosea 13:15-16, God claims he will have no mercy upon the people of Samaria because they changed their religious belief, and promises to rip open all of the pregnant women so as to destroy any fetuses, despite the fact that they would not have been involved in the selection of a new religion.

Such passages of the Bible are not taken in a proof-text manner by Christian tradition (that is, they are applicable to the question, although they do not mention abortion), but as illustrations of a basic ethical principle of the created order — a unity of instruction, or "world-view". And this provides for a syllogism, which forms the basis of the modern Christian pro-life movement. Scripture condemns the shedding of innocent human blood. The biblical insight into the order of things is that man is distinct from, and above an animal; and man is uniquely subject to God, whereas animals are given to man; and an unborn child is human and known to God. Therefore, even an unborn child is protected by God, as made in the image of God because it is human (an issue distinct from all speculations of when life begins).

Further, many Christians hold that God sanctifies every aspect of human life starting from conception. One example of this is Jesus being equally divine and human from conception, therefore showing humanity the very sacredness in each developmental stage of gestation. Jesus, according to Christian teaching, did not become divine or human at some later date but was so from the very moment of coception. Jesus' mother, Mary, is also used to refute some arguments that women may use to have an abortion: Mary was young, poor, Joseph considered leaving her, and they lived in a time of great oppression. Despite this, Mary had the baby.

For some, the view that life begins at conception is unresolved. In their view, ancient ethical reasoning is not given the same weight in all Christian traditions, with the result that old issues are revisited, as it were, for the first time. Secondly, they hold that modern science has provided a window to an embryo's beginnings at a microscopic level unenvisioned by tradition; so that, the more traditional view, which used life's beginning at quickening (when the embryo first began to move) as the starting point for reasoning, is not always perfectly applicable to a life beginning at conception. For example about 10% of all pregnancies end by natural miscarriage - in most cases earlier than pregnancy is detectable without modern technology. In their view, the ethical interest in these miscarriages, as reflected in laws for example, has never been on the same scale as interest in the unexplained death of a born person; all the more the case, if the expelled fetus cannot be seen without special equipment.

Others counter that the personhood of a fetus is not disproven by the fact that a significant percentage of fetuses die in utero, any more than a child is shown not to be a person by the fact that, absent modern medicine, a significant percentage of already born children die before reaching adulthood. Besides, the traditional view that personhood begins at quickening, rather than at conception, is a contrast between ancient technology and modern technology for recognizing a human child; consequently, the comparison does not indicate that the traditional opposition to abortion would have been different if informed by modern technology, and rather, has tended to solidify the conclusion that life begins at conception.

Roman Catholicism

Christian writers from the first-century author of the Didache, to the late Pope Paul VI in his Humanae Vitae, to Pope John Paul II in his encyclical Evangelium Vitae ("The Gospel of Life") have maintained that the Bible forbids abortion. Although the Roman Catholic Church has always considered abortion a grave offense, it has at times punished the offense differently depending on the stage of pregnancy in which the abortion was performed. For example, under Pope Gregory XIV excommunication was prescribed only for those aborting a "quickened" child. ^* "Quickened" refers to the stage of pregnancy in which the child can first be felt to move. Excommunication is a formal recognition of the reality that a person is no longer in communion with the Roman Catholic Church's teachings, and is no longer eligible to receive the various sacraments. The person excommunicated can contritely confess the sin (material cooperation in an abortion) to a priest and be received back into the Roman Catholic Church.

The Roman Catholic Church today firmly holds that "the first right of the human person is his life" and that life is assumed to begin at fertilization. The equality of all human life is fundamental and complete, any discrimination is evil. Therefore, even when a woman's life appears jeopardized, choosing her life over her child's is no less discrimination between two lives - and therefore morally unacceptable. However, the Roman Catholic Church does make a clear distinction between direct abortion & indirect abortion. Direct abortion as a means or an end is always viewed as a moral evil. Indirect abortion occurs when treatment used to save the life of the mother has the secondary side effect of killing the unborn child. An example of indirect abortion is seen in cases of ectopic pregnancy where the fallopian tube would be removed with the unborn intact, saving the life of the woman, but resulting in the indirect death of the unborn. The Roman Catholic Church only recognizes very rare cases where indirect abortion is permissible and views the vast majority abortive procedures to be the result of procuring a direct abortion.^*

Catholics who procure or participate in an abortion suffer ipso facto latae sententiae (automatic, literally by that very fact the sentence is incurred) excommunication under Canon law, provided that the person knows of the penalty at the time the abortion occurs. The Roman Catholic Church also considers the destruction of any embryo to be equivalent to abortion. The following practices are considered immoral because they are likely to involve the destruction of an embryo: any birth control method that potentially may prevent implanation (IUDs, Emergency contraception, Hormonal contraception, i.e. "The Pill" ); embryonic stem cell research or therapy; and in vitro fertilisation (which almost always involves the discarding of a fertilized embryo and is also considered immoral for other reasons). However, the Roman Catholic bishops in the U.S. state that it is moral to provide the "Morning After Pill" or Emergency Contraceptive if fertilization has not occurred to victims of rape or incest. [http://www.usccb.org/prolife/issues/abortion/ecfact.htm Further, Roman Catholic women may use hormonal birth control methods if they remain celibate during the course of treatment.

In sum, the Roman Catholic Church teaches that direct abortion is always a grave evil. The Second Vatican Council in 1965 referred to abortion as "an unspeakable crime" in the document Gaudium et Spes (Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World):

"^*rom the moment of its conception life must be guarded with the greatest care while abortion and infanticide are unspeakable crimes."

A conciliar Constitution is the most authoritative expression of Catholic faith that exists because they are only issued with the affirmation of a vast majority of all the bishops in the world in union with the pope. Roman Catholic leaders often explain that modern advancements in scientific and medical knowledge of DNA and pre-natal development have simply affirmed the Roman Catholic Church's understanding of the beginning of human life.

Eastern Orthodox

While not all the Orthodox share Roman Catholicism's objections to all contraception, they agree that life begins at conception, and that abortion (including the use of abortifacient drugs) is the taking of a human life. This view is reflected in their observance of the Feast of the Annunciation, when Jesus was conceived, and also of the feast of the conception of the Virgin Mary and the feast of the conception of John the Forerunner. Today, many Orthodox leaders have also spoken out against euthanasia and human cloning as related practices that reflect a devaluation of human life.

Protestant

Protestant views on abortion vary considerably. However, the general consensus is that the use of birth control methods is not prohibited, except for "morning after pills" or other forms which are considered abortifacient, where the views are more divergent and are often based on the general view of abortion held by the group or person.

There is no instrument by which a formal definition of doctrine can be declared for all Evangelical and fundamentalist movements and churches. Therefore, the teaching held in general by these groups must be discerned sociologically. Especially in the United States, the view is widely held that abortion is a form of infanticide. The groups are substantially united in the view that "abortion for convenience" (abortion where there is no mortal danger to the woman, or where the pregnancy resulted from rape or incest) is always wrong and should be banned. However, there is no consensus within these camps as to whether exceptions should be allowed when the woman's life is in mortal danger, or when the pregnancy resulted from rape or incest. Some argue that the lives of both woman and child should be given equal consideration, in effect condemning all abortion, including those performed to save the life of the woman. However, others argue for exceptions which favor the life of the woman, perhaps including pregnancies resulting from the corner cases of rape or incest.

Increasingly, in recent elections since the 1970s, many Evangelical and fundamentalist churches have encouraged their congregations to vote based on the pro-life agenda, and preach that it is a religious duty to seek legislation restricting or eliminating access to abortion, and for laws requiring parental consent for minors and more complete disclosure of the risks involved.

The "mainline" Protestant churches continue to be divided over the issue. While generally tending to be reluctantly supportive of legal abortion in limited circumstances, most of the mainline denominations have factions of both the pro-life and the pro-choice movements active within them. As a result, the mainliners are usually not officially, institutionally aligned with either side of the debate. The Southern Baptist Convention is the notable exception, having reversed its prior 1970's position of being reluctantly in favor to its current position in substantial opposition (however, stances issued from the national level are not necessarily reflective of state and local associations or individual Baptist congregations). In addition, most Anglican bishops hold and teach that abortion is grave sin, as do most Lutheran bodies.

For a more detailed examination of the Evangelical position on abortion, see Abortion and Evangelical Christians.

Mormonism

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints takes a strong position against abortion. Justifications for this stem from Doctrine and Covenants 59:6: "Thou shalt not...kill, nor do anything like unto it."

Several recent church publications contain the following statements: "Counsel on the matter is clear: Members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints must not submit to, perform, encourage, pay for, or arrange for an abortion. If you encourage an abortion in any way, you may be subject to Church discipline."

"Some exceptional circumstances may justify an abortion, such as when pregnancy is the result of incest or rape, when the life or health of the mother is judged by competent medical authority to be in serious jeopardy, or when the fetus is known by competent medical authority to have severe defects that will not allow the baby to survive beyond birth. But even these circumstances do not automatically justify an abortion. Those who face such circumstances should consider abortion only after consulting with their local Church leaders and receiving a confirmation through earnest prayer." True to the Faith (LDS) article on abortion. Retrieved 2006-05-06.

Hinduism

Hinduism teaches that abortion is a great crime and one of the worst sins. It is one of the six kinds of murder described in Hindu culture. Moreover, abortion thwarts a soul in its progress towards God, like any other act of violence. It teaches that a fetus is a living, conscious person deserving of protection. Hinduism has traditionally taught that a soul is reincarnated and enters the embryo at the time the embryo is conceived. In fact, one of the seven legendary immortals or Chiranjeevin in Hinduism, Ashwatthama, was cursed by Lord Krishna, avatar of Vishnu to immortality and eternal suffering partly for killing the fetus, later born as Parikshit, grandson of Arjuna when he was in his mother's womb. Parakashit was born stillborn but was raised from the dead by Shri Krishna. ^*" target="_blank" >[http://www.chennaionline.com/festivalsnreligion/religion/bala.asp.

Islam

Islam generally does not approve of abortion, seeing it as a grave sin, contrary to nature and to the manifest will of Allah. The only exception that is widely agreed upon by Muslim scholars is where the woman's life is in jeopardy and the living fetus has not yet become a living human being, as this is seen as destroying a potential human life to save one already existent. 120 days is often seen as the point at which a fetus (which is often regarded as a living non-human) becomes fully human, although other scholars prefer to focus on the time of quickening, and others still consider the life of the woman to take precedence over the foetus throughout the pregnancy (although it is universily accepted that the later the term, the graver the sin and harder the abortion is to jusitfy). Some, although few, Muslim scholars also argue for limited exceptions in early pregnancy if the newborn might be sick in some way that would make its care exceptionally difficult for the parents (eg. deformities, mental retardation, etc.) or in cases of rape/incest. It is also understood that if one is obtaining an abortion for financial or emotional reasons then one is doubting Allah and Allah's ability to provide.

Judaism

Jewish tradition holds life (including the life of a fetus) as sacred, and does not permit abortion on demand. However, it sanctions (or mandates) abortion under some circumstances, namely for medical reason. This is allowed in principle because Judaism does not regard the fetus as a full human being. This is based partly on the Torah (Exodus 21:22-23), which prescribes monetary damages when a person injures a pregnant woman, causing a miscarriage (in Jewish law the killing of a person cannot result in mere compensation). Overtly, such a parable is not one of malfeascent murder. The sole act of deliberate aggression is the aforementioned quarrel in which the two men are engaged. The Jewish regard for the sanctity of life is exemplified throught the prescription of this monetary compensation, as no punitive statute is invoked in the case of manslaughter, reiterated doggedly by Deuteronomy. Abortion, when necessary, must take place before the first 40 days, when the fetus is referred to as "mere water".

The Mishna (Oholot 7:6) explicitly indicates that one must abort a fetus if the continuation of pregnancy might imperil the life of the woman. Later authorities have differed as to how far one might go in defining the peril to the woman in order to justify abortion, and at what stage of gestation a fetus is considered having a soul.

Orthodox Judaism

Orthodox Judaism generally prohibits abortion in any other circumstance than to save the woman's life. Although a recent rabbinical authority holds the minority view that a child with known Tay-Sachs disease may be aborted due to its dismal prognosis, this view has not been accepted as of 2005 by most rabbinical authorities. Psychiatric disease in the woman and rape as the cause of pregnancy are debated by the Acharonim (post-1550 authorities), but generally abortion is morally permissible only if there is actual danger to the life of the woman.

Conservative Judaism

The Rabbinical Assembly Committee on Jewish Law and Standards takes the view that an abortion is justifiable if a continuation of pregnancy might cause the woman severe physical or psychological harm, or when the fetus is judged by competent medical opinion as severely defective. The fetus is a life in the process of development, and the decision to abort should never be taken lightly. Thus, the Conservative position is in line with some of the Acharonim who permit an abortion in case of acute potential emotional and psychological harm.

Before reaching her final decision, Conservative Judaism holds that the woman should consult with the biological father, other members of her family, her physician, her Rabbi and any other person who can help her in assessing the many grave legal and moral issues involved.

Sikhism

Abortion is generally forbidden in Sikhism, as it interferes in the creative work of God - who created everything and is present in every being.

Most Sikhs accept that life begins at conception (one reference is found on page 74 of the Guru Granth Sahib).

So if conception has taken place, it would be a sin to destroy life and hence deliberate miscarriage or abortion is forbidden.

The Sikh code of conduct does not deal with abortion (or indeed many other bioethical issues).

Despite this theoretical viewpoint, abortion is not uncommon among the Sikh community in India, and there is concern that the practice of aborting female embryos because of a cultural preference for sons is growing.

Religious groups supporting abortion rights

Many religious organisations support the legalisation of modern, medically supervised abortion.

This support is often tempered by conditions such as:

abortion is not a method of birth control,
abortion is not to be used for sex selection,
abortion is not to be used for population control, and
abortion should not be used to provide fetal tissue for transplantation.

Some organizations support abortion rights only in limited situations such as rape, incest, or cases in which continued pregnancy may jeopardize the life or health (physical or mental) of the woman.

Here is a partial list of religious groups that support abortion rights.

References

External links

Cleanup from April 2006 | Abortion | Religious law | Religion and politics

Religione ed aborto

Gourt Home::Gourt :: Religion and abortion