Why Christians Should Never Vote For Criminalizing Abortion Based On Religious Morality

10:12 Finally, the real meat of the issue (about abortion rights vs faith). -- Rob says voting to outlaw abortion is *not* an attempt to force an anti-abortion belief onto others. But of course it is. Because by voting to outlaw or greatly restrict abortion based on the voting-person's religious (or "spiritual") beliefs, the voting-person is trying to create a situation where: Someone who wants a legal and safe abortion has no access to it because of legal *force* being used to shut down all such access. Moreover, we're talking about force backup by literal guns, night-sticks, tasers, etc, along with the equally-immediate threat of prison (or worse)). Additionally, if someone attempts to have (or assist, or provide) an abortion in violation of that law (a law voted into law by Christians and for religious reasons), then: they attempt that under threat of being arrested (at gun point) and thrown into a prison cell (and/or executed). Also, a society's common values are shaped by whatever laws it 'gets used to'. So if your super-dangerous religious/political cult gets its way, and if it can then hold on to those reigns long enough, our society would gradually acclimate to the new status-quo-morals framework. That means that many people's "beliefs" will be caused via prolonged force. That how it works when 'a people' are institutionalized by the tides of cultural change; even when that cultural change is shaped via prolonged force. Why is this so difficult for Christians to understand? Every vote cast in any attempt to create or perpetuate any criminal law, ... is always and automatically an attempt to mobilize violent force, as a means to force compliance (with those laws) into others. Voting for any criminal law means voting for enforcement OF that law via threat of physical violence. That includes the immediate violence of the police-threat itself, and then the violence of an arrest, and then the follow-up violence in prison, and the fatal violence that happens at a person's execution (in case such a law goes far; which some would), etc. We must also consider the violent consequences to the larger family OF the arrested persons. Remember. "Violence" isn't always a matter of sudden kinetic energy directly traumatizing soft-tissues. Violence is any act or choice which predictably results in any form of trauma (physical, psychological, or emotional). We must also consider the violent consequences to any later-formed children that are forced into existence under parent(s) who knew during the first trimester that they wouldn't be able to provide for all that future-child's needs. We must also consider the violent consequences to pregnant women (and tiny, underage girls, age 8-teens) per the danger to their own lives when forced to carry non-viable pregnancies, and/or forced to carry a pregnancy to term after being told by a qualified physician that said pregnancy would likely result in their own death. All of that is, by definition, unavoidably, inarguably., an attempt to mobilize a government's physical force and threat of violence to impose that law onto others. And to whatever extent it causes physical and/or psychological trauma (either directly or as a predictable result) it is actively committing violence against any citizens whom would suffer those consequences. Additionally, voting to ban or greatly-restrict access to legal and safe abortions results (inevitably) in a sharp rise in fatalities from young girls and women utilizing illegal abortions and self-administered abortions. All the while, the very act of fighting or voting to criminalize access to abortions is a direct and blatant violation of the "moral principal of free will" that Christians claim to prioritize. How much sense does it really make(?) for a religious person to argue that "the reason" their GOD allows so much suffering in our world, and so then "the reason" he doesn't interfere by means of any force whatsoever, is that: HE prioritizes "Free Will" (for this world) OVER that of His own will, because "reasons". - Reasons like: "He wants to prove how badly things go for humans when they don't fully surrender to his will and moral-laws". But then the very same religious people argue that GOD sent THEM to FORCE moral-compliance (with some cherry-picked issues) over people who aren't in his "one true religion" (or. "one true "totally not a religion")? If your GOD wants YOU to force compliance with some moral-laws, then why not for ALL moral-laws? And if he's cool with you acting AS HIS HANDS in this world, to weaponize a government against citizens who don't share your views and values, to FORCE compliance with his moral laws, then: How can that claim be harmonized with the claim that he's letting "this wicked world" do whatever it wants, without him interfering, because "reasons"? He's either for OR against enforcing moral-law-compliance against "the world". Which is it? Meanwhile, if a 1st-trimester fetus is "a person" with "a soul", then what happens to them when they "die"? If they go straight to heaven forever, isn't that more preferable than being later-born onto an Earthly-life? "Down here", their ODDS of avoiding "eternal damnation" are super-BAD once they reach some "age of accountability". And that's compared to 100%-assured if they are aborted. Right? Whereas, if you say you don't know IF those "babies" end up in a HELL, then that's the same as saying you don't know IF your God is super-evil or not. And you don't really have the luxury of saying you "don't know what your God would do" if the REASON you are a Christian is because you're impressed by EXACTLY what that proposed-Entity's moral values are. Whereas, if you entertain hypotheticals which avoid both outcomes, like saying "maybe they get born to other parents later instead", then wouldn't that mean they aren't "dying" but are merely being relocated? For being part of a larger "church" of deep-thinkers, who are "spirit led" (by a perfect omni-everything BEING) into all (necessary) understanding, and who have had THOUSANDS OF YEARS to hash all of it out (philosophically and morally), I remain impressed by how much the whole lot of you haven't really 'thought it through'.