Christianity’s ensoulment doctrine made abortion a crime against the fetus

Evidence

A Middle Ages penitential book declares: “If a pregnant woman destroys her fruit before forty-five days, she is subject to a penitence of one year. For sixty days, three years. And finally, if the infant is already animated, she should be tried for homicide.” The book, however, adds: “There is a great difference between a poor woman who destroys her infant for the pain she has to feed it and the one who has no other reason but to hide a crime of fornication.” — Simone de Beauvoir, The Second Sex, 274 (#expands, via linked claim)

Though late to the ERA, Schlafly was already concerned about abortion in 1972, the year before Roe v. Wade, in part because she was Catholic. Catholics had a long history of condemning abortion, even when women’s lives were at stake. Some fundamentalist pastors agreed, though they weren’t eager to cooperate with Catholics on the issue. But most evangelicals were far less certain. The Bible didn’t offer specific advice on the topic. Many evangelicals disapproved of “abortion-on-demand,” but not in the case of rape or incest, where fetal abnormalities were present, or when a woman’s life was at risk. In 1968, Christianity Today considered the question of therapeutic abortion—was it a blessing, or murder? They gave no definitive answer. As late as 1971, the Southern Baptist Convention passed a resolution urging states to expand access to abortion. But with the liberalization of abortion laws, and as abortion proponents began to frame the issue in terms of women controlling their reproduction, evangelicals started to reconsider their position. In 1973, Roe v. Wade—and the rising popularity of abortion in its wake—helped force the issue, but even then, evangelical mobilization was not immediate. Only in time, as abortion became more closely linked to feminism and the sexual revolution, did evangelicals begin to frame it not as a difficult moral choice, but rather as an assault on women’s God-given role, on the family, and on Christian America itself. — Kristin Kobes Du Mez, Jesus and John Wayne, 160 (#complicates, via linked claim)

This reasoning succumbs to the fallacy of petitio principii, commonly identified as circular reasoning or begging the question. Thus, a fetus is not considered to have certain legal rights because it has not been born. No reason in logic is given why these rights could not be ascribed to a child before birth, only that they are not. When the question presented is whether or not legal rights should be ascribed, that question cannot be answered simply by stating that the law does not do so. — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 1180 (#responds-to, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Evangelical opposition to abortion was initially uncertain and politically constructed — Kristin Kobes Du Mez, Jesus and John Wayne: How White…, 160; Medieval penance graded abortion severity by fetal age and by motive — Simone de Beauvoir, The Second Sex, 274; Arguing a fetus lacks rights because it is not born is circular reasoning — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 1180 (+1 more)

Broader Connections

• Medieval penance graded abortion severity by fetal age and by motive #expands (0.80) — Simone de Beauvoir, The Second Sex, 274
• Evangelical opposition to abortion was initially uncertain and politically constructed #complicates (0.75) — Kristin Kobes Du Mez, Jesus and John Wayne, 160
• Arguing a fetus lacks rights because it is not born is circular reasoning #responds-to (0.75) — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 1180