Doesn't pro-life legislation violate freedom of religion?

Question

As we all know, Roe V. Wade is in danger of being overturned, largely due to the influences of various religions. They believe life begins at conception. In order to ban abortion, people would have to assume that people have a soul, etc. What right does the pro-life movement have to force these ideas on non-Christians? What is their legal justification?

Answer 1

No.  Religious influences are not appropriate as a basis for any sort of legislation.  "Pro-life" legislation may be advocated for religious reasons, but it enters into a realm where legislation should not go.

Answer 2

Regardless of how Liberals will try and spin this statement, I must say it anyway.  The idea life begins at conception is not a religious argument by itself.  It just so happens many people will cite religion as to their belief of the idea.

The truth is that there is no way we will even truly know whether or not life begins at conception or not.  I do think we can all agree whether it is a termination of a clump of cells or an actual murder, abortion does involve the destruction of something.

Here is the real deal...

Since we really don't know, and it is all based on belief, if Pro-Lifer's are wrong, all that happened is that some people were inconvenienced.  If Pro-Choicer's are wrong, an atrocity was committed.

So why shouldn't we overturn Roe Vs. Wade?

Maybe we can return to Pro-Choice  when we invent a "Life Detection Machine"?

Answer 3

Personally, no. But, if someone wants to spread(like the government), or force their ideals upon others, then that means their freedom of religion is abused by those in power. These type of issues shouldn't concern the federal level. Since it's merely a non-issue, or a personal issue, it should be left for the states to decide, or at the local level. People have the right to do what ever they want in their life, just not force someone to accept, or view their way of thinking. Good question.  

Answer 4

To legistlate soley based on scripture is a violation of religion.

But not everyone against Roe v Wade are so based on religion.

Science makes it very hard to consider a 6 mo old fetus anything but a human.  And naturally , there are legal consequenses to that.

But there is no science to indicate that a fetus is a human life at conception.

Answer 5

I wish those who advocate for Pro-Life; put the money where their mouth is by adopting and taking in abused children or those abandon.

Answer 6

I can't think of one case where human sacrifice was preserved as a religious act under the constitution.  You only have to assume that people have life.  Your BS about a soul is hyperbole.  You may notice that in the order of LIFE, LIBERTY, AND THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS, life comes first.  Did you even think about what you were writing?

Answer 7

The freedom of religion is not an absolute freedom. As with most laws giving "rights" there are exceptions. The most famous being the freedom of speech does not allow one to yell fire in a crowded theater, unless of course there is a fire.

Laws are normally balancing acts. In the case of "pro-life" legislation the legislators have determined that the rights of un-born trump the right of freedom of religion of an individual.  This is because the un-born have no voice of their own.

Roe v. Wade is NOT in danger of being overturned. Liberals love to scare people to death with this threat, but it is not a valid one. Roe v Wade is bad law and may become adjusted at some point but even so abortions will not be abolished.  

Rest your fears.

Answer 8

No.

NEXT!!

Answer 9

So swampy, the woman behaved badly huh?  Last I knew it took a male to behave badly too.  Why does the woman always get blamed.  The male has just an important a role in any pregnancy as the woman.  

Answer 10

Oh but murder is OK for pro abortion folk to force your view on the unborn human?

I guess if a 10 year old loses his parents in a tragic accident, no relatives to care for him, nobody to adopt him, we should murder him too?

Answer 11

We can not condone murder.  Use birth control.  Pro Choice, use any kind of birth control you choose.  There is various kinds to choose from.

Answer 12

What do you mean by saying it violates freedom of religion? Are people still sacrificing children to idols? I don't agree that a ban on abortion is faith based. I've met a few secular people who were very much against abortion so, it's not just a religious commotion.

We all get our beliefs from somewhere. Whether it be religious texts, mans opinions, or a conviction of the conscience. We all have the right to vote according to those examples I just cited. This is still a free country, right? The government works for the people - whether they are religious or not. Everyone has a line they cannot cross. Sucking unborn babies down a sink is one of mine. There is not going to be a middle-path in this matter for some people.

Added - Also, if they are going to murder infants can we at least give them a proper burial and not throw them in the trash bin? Can we all agree on that?

Answer 13

You are assuming the baby has no rights, it is a living being and should be respected and nurtured not murdered. Soul or no soul it is a living baby. Basically abortion is about lack of personal responsibility, a woman behaves badly gets pregnant and kills her baby because it is inconvenient. How is that ever justified.

Janet of course they both did behave badly, but the man has no say in the matter, a woman can murder her baby no matter what the man wants.

Answer 14

That's ridiculous.

In order to ban abortion, you would just need to acknowledge that it's a HUMAN.  That's where the big disagreement lies.

There are TONS of non-christian people who still believe abortion kills a PERSON.

If you are any kind of a decent person, you believe that a newborn baby is a person,  It doesn;t take religion to make the jump to believe it was a person a few hours ago, befor it was born.

Answer 15

grasping at straws now are we?...that's a good sign that the abomination of Row v Wade is almost gone

Answer 16

What is the legal justification?  Scientific truth.  A fetus has its own DNA, not the DNA of its mother.

Answer 17

The precise point about the Bush Administration's new policy is that it regards birth control methods, such as the pill, as ABORTION!

How can we stand for a rule that says birth control equals abortion?!

Answer 18

For pro lifers it's not about religion, it's about life. Since they believe life begins at conception, that fetus is enumerated with rights and liberties bestowed upon them by the Constitution.

So what's to stop any other person from being killed since some people do not believe in religion or humans having souls. With your logic, we're all eligible for euthanasia since we may not have souls. Why single out fetuses?

Btw, not all pro lifers are religious. Also, Roe V. Wade should be overturned, and allow individual States to decide on the matter, we are a federalist union after all.

Answer 19

For many people it's about religion.

I however am an atheist, yet I believe abortion is wrong.

Abortion is having an unborn child pay the price, with it's life, for the mistakes of it's parents.  

Ultimately, what is the job of the US government?  To protect LIFE, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness.  

To Progress:  Like John McCain?