Abortion and Limbo

Originally posted by SwissGambit
Well, that's a rather selfish stance to take.

What more heroic act is possible than that of giving up your own eternal soul to save the eternal souls of others?

They'd have to write a new book of the Bible to commemorate it.

I can't tell if you are being serious. Do you really think that a credible argument?

Originally posted by SwissGambit
I've tried to get pro-life theists to answer this question several times here; no such luck.

If aborted fetuses all go to heaven, then wouldn't it make sense to abort as many of them as possible, to ensure that they don't grow up and reject salvation?

If aborted fetuses all go to hell, does that seem fair in that they never had a chance to be saved ...[text shortened]... dmission of ignorance on the issue, something that pro-life Christians are not wont to do.

Fascinating logic. So if infants who die also go to heaven, and perhaps all children who haven't reached the age of reason yet, then are you also asking why not go to maternity wards and preschools and commit mass murder?

Originally posted by pawnhandler
Fascinating logic. So if infants who die also go to heaven, and perhaps all children who haven't reached the age of reason yet, then are you also asking why not go to maternity wards and preschools and commit mass murder?

Absolutely.

After all, what's a few years of missed earthly life compared to an eternity living in heaven/paradise?

Originally posted by Conrau K
I can't tell if you are being serious. Do you really think that a credible argument?

I find the argument totally credible.

If it is really true that letting people grow up only gives them the chance to miss out on an eternal life in paradise, and be tormented and tortured eternally instead, then it is incredibly foolish to let them live.

Originally posted by SwissGambit
I've tried to get pro-life theists to answer this question several times here; no such luck.

If aborted fetuses all go to heaven, then wouldn't it make sense to abort as many of them as possible, to ensure that they don't grow up and reject salvation?

If aborted fetuses all go to hell, does that seem fair in that they never had a chance to be saved ...[text shortened]... dmission of ignorance on the issue, something that pro-life Christians are not wont to do.

It's a sin.

Originally posted by SwissGambit
Absolutely.

After all, what's a few years of missed earthly life compared to an eternity living in heaven/paradise?

Christ actually supports the underlying logic

MT 5:30 And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.

But it does not apply to babies.

Originally posted by Rajk999
Christ actually supports the underlying logic

MT 5:30 And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.

But it does not apply to babies.

Take a group of 51 people.

Which is the morally preferable result:
A) one goes to hell; the other 50 go to heaven.
B) one goes to heaven; the other 50 go to hell.

By analogy, the one is a 'member' of the body, and the other 50 are the 'whole body'.

Originally posted by SwissGambit
Take a group of 51 people.

Which is the morally preferable result:
A) one goes to hell; the other 50 go to heaven.
B) one goes to heaven; the other 50 go to hell.

By analogy, the one is a 'member' of the body, and the other 50 are the 'whole body'.

You should ALWAYS try to save yourself, you are the most important for you to try to save because if you can't save yourself you can't save others.

Originally posted by SwissGambit
I find the argument totally credible.

If it is really true that letting people grow up only gives them the chance to miss out on an eternal life in paradise, and be tormented and tortured eternally instead, then it is incredibly foolish to let them live.

Well, I have renounced the Christian title but I can still hypothesise several possible objections:

1. There is no assurance that a fetus will definitely enter heaven;
2. It is not certain that the fetus has a soul, so the result would be that a potential person was denied any chance of salvation (although many Christians, especially Catholics, now accept the position that the soul is infused at conception, it is not a dogmatic point);
3. Jesus himself recommends the Gospel as the path to salvation and commissions disciples to preach to the nations, not to perform abortions;
4. Murder is a violation against the Natural Law ordained by God. Furthermore, the ends never justify the means and so the killing of the fetus is always wrong no matter what possible advantages may follow;
5. Life is a gift from God. To kill the fetus would be an offense to God and also a denial of that gift to the unborn;
6. The fetus could have become a saint in any case and have become an inspiration to others to convert and embrace God;
7. According to Catholic piety, the soul enjoys heaven to the degree it has merited on earth. Having entered the closest possible relation with God, the saint experiences supreme rapture. The fetus could not attain that;
8. When there is a bodily resurrection, fetuses will be disadvantaged.

Originally posted by SwissGambit
Take a group of 51 people.

Which is the morally preferable result:
A) one goes to hell; the other 50 go to heaven.
B) one goes to heaven; the other 50 go to hell.

By analogy, the one is a 'member' of the body, and the other 50 are the 'whole body'.

Not everyone is a utilitarian. Means are as important as ends.

Originally posted by SwissGambit
Take a group of 51 people.

Which is the morally preferable result:
A) one goes to hell; the other 50 go to heaven.
B) one goes to heaven; the other 50 go to hell.

By analogy, the one is a 'member' of the body, and the other 50 are the 'whole body'.

A.

But you are assuming that you fully understand all the dynamics involved in the 50 getting salvation. Nobody knows for sure how death, resurrection, hell, salvation works.

Originally posted by daniel58
You should ALWAYS try to save yourself, you are the most important for you to try to save because if you can't save yourself you can't save others.

I disagree. You certainly can save others.

Originally posted by SwissGambit
I disagree. You certainly can save others.

You are right, but YOU CAN'T SAVE OTHERS UNLESS YOU SAVE YOURSELF.

Originally posted by Conrau K
Well, I have renounced the Christian title but I can still hypothesise several possible objections:

1. There is no assurance that a fetus will definitely enter heaven;
2. It is not certain that the fetus has a soul, so the result would be that a potential person was denied any chance of salvation (although many Christians, especially Catholics, now ac ...[text shortened]... could not attain that;
8. When there is a bodily resurrection, fetuses will be disadvantaged.

1. This objection is a valid reason not to actually go out and start harvesting fetuses, but does little to address the philosophical side of the dilemma.
2. It need not be a dogmatic point, but it sounds like they believe souls arise at conception to me. This one doesn't do much to escape the dilemma.
3. Jesus' plan has far less than a 100% success rate. My plan is thus better.
4. I see no reason to accept that the 'end never justifies the means'. Too dogmatic, especially given what's at stake. Besides, it's easy to give a counterexample. A man breaks into my house and threatens me, or my family. I pull out a gun and shoot him. The end [keeping me and my family safe] justifies the means [taking another human life, which is deplorable under normal circumstances].
5. Offending God is fine as long as souls are saved. That's the most important thing.
6. Interesting - but fact remains that the world is roughly only 1/3 christian. The salvation success rate is abysmal, despite the saints and all.
7. Hmm - I wonder why God would artificially limit relationships between himself and those in heaven in this way. Still, the point remains that they have had no chance of going to hell. Even a marginal heavenly experience is still light-years ahead of that.
8. Why?

Originally posted by Conrau K
Not everyone is a utilitarian. Means are as important as ends.

I don't generally think of myself as one, either. However, this strikes me as a rather extreme case.

It's like a pacifist who has a chance to kill a guy before he fires a nuclear warhead that kills a few million people.