To be morally "fair and balanced", we should have consequential sexual penalties for men --- like castration---especially for clergymen and politicians who violate the public trust.

The Roman Catholic Church has lead the way in opposing abortion rights with Evangelical Protestants following obediently as a daughter follows her mother. The Roman Catholic church teaches that a human person comes into existence at conception, about two weeks before the fertilized ovum implants itself in the wall of the uterus and the pregnancy begins. They believe the Commandment "Thou shalt not murder" prohibits artificially ending either the implantation process or later life of the fetus. Hence, even the "morning after" pill is murder.

St. Augustine 354-430 CE, considered greatest of the Latin Fathers and one of the most eminent Western Doctors of the Church, accepted the Aristotelian Greek Pagan concept of "delayed ensoulment". He wrote that a human soul cannot live in an unformed body. An abortion in early pregnancy was not murder because no soul was destroyed. To this extent, Roman Catholic Popes condoned abortion and were Pro-Choice for almost 1,200 years.

Then Papal Infallibility suffered some ethically challenged flip-flops. In 1588, Pope Sixtus forbid all abortions. A short time later in 1591, Pope Gregory XIV rescinded Pope Sixtus’ edict against abortion. In the 17th century, the concept of "simultaneous animation" gained acceptance in the church_. This is the belief that an embryo acquires a soul at the time of conception, not at 40 or 80 days into gestation as the church had previously taught. In 1869, Pope Pius IX dropped the distinction between the "fetus animatus" and "fetus inanimatus", to forbid all abortions in exchange for Napoleon III of France acknowledging papal infallibility. Canon law was revised in 1917 and 1983 to refer simply to "the fetus."

Pope Pius XI's 1930 document "Casti connubii" taught that abortion was condemned even when the life of the mother was at stake. Its underlying postulate is that performing an abortion to save the mother's life is not permitted.

Touchstone Magazine, a Christian magazine sums up today’s hard-line Pro-Life position for both Catholics and Protestants: "...there are no cases which condone abortion.... The act is murder, it is always murder, and there are no circumstances, whatever, in which murder is a legitimate moral option. The deliberate, directly intended killing of an innocent life is a sin that screams to heaven for vengeance. Always, in all circumstances, and with no exceptions."

What does scripture say about the beginning of life? God made Adam's body out of the dust of the earth. But, "man became a living soul" only AFTER God "breathed into his nostrils the breath of life." (Gen 2:7) Adam's person hood started AFTER the physical creation process was complete and he took his first breath. The "law of first mention" rule for biblical interpretation this truth. Numerous Hebrew scriptures affirm this Jewish interpretation that life begins AFTER birth. "Thou shalt not murder" refers to the murder of a human life. A fetus is not a human life. Hence, today modern Israel provides abortion on-demand.

Is there scientific evidence or explanation for ensoulment? No!

Is there scientific evidence for humans having a soul? No!

Did God ever instigate or condone abortion? Yes, God established a law that induced abortion for women suspected of adultery (Num 5:17-31). God’s judgment of the people of Samaria included abortion, "their little ones will be dashed to the ground, their pregnant women ripped open" (Hos 13:15-16). Jesus said "it had been good for a man if he had not been born"(Mt 26:24) which could be interpreted as meaning that an abortion would have been better for some.

Is there a difference between miscarriage and abortion? Anthony R. Scialli of the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at Georgetown University Medical Center states that "Most doctors consider a miscarriage as a protective mechanism that prevents the continued pregnancy of a non-viable or abnormal embryo or fetus." Studies show 30% to 50% of pregnancies end in a miscarriage, depending on the age of the mother. Miscarriage though unfortunate is perfectly normal and has the same result as abortion. Miscarriage is God’s method of aborting a fetus. If God were anti-abortion than He’d be anti-miscarriage. The fact is, under certain circumstances God always has been and always will be pro-abortion.

Does an aborted fetus go to heaven? There are no facts to support a conclusion, only theological speculation. Protestant theology emphatically states: Yes! If God in His foreknowledge knows that by His design 30% to 50% of all pregnancies end in miscarriage, that the aborted fetus or baby is innocent, and God’s nature is love, than the heaven destiny seems like sound Protestant theology. In contrast, Roman Catholicism teaches that God rejects non-baptized fetuses or babies because of "original sin" (it’s Eve’s fault). Presumably the innocent fetus or baby goes to an uncertain Limbo, the fringe of heaven. This contradiction reflecting on the perceived nature and plan of God and is a major difference between Catholic and Protestant theologies.

The question of morals: Moral laws do not apply just to women and not men. Neither do women get pregnant all by themselves. "It takes two to tango." Any discussion of one’s right to control their own body that does not apply equally to both women and men is obviously biased and grossly unfair. No loving moral father would ever treat his children in such a fashion. Nevertheless, this is the pro-life emphasis.

Sanctity of life is always put forth as if it were an insurmountable bulwark suggesting God regards life as inviolable. In contrast, the Bible presents a God for whom life is cheap. This God murders or orders murder on over 45 occasions in the Bible, uses abortion as judgment (Hos 13:16), and in the book Revelation murders millions. He instigates "gang rape" of innocent women (II Sam 12:11). Jesus indicates life is clearly less then a top priority when He says "His enemies who would not that He rule over them should be slain at his feet" (Lk19:27). Sanctity of life is pure religious conjecture and provides no moral guidance.

Sanctity of life is raised as if the only life that is important is that of the fetus. Are pregnant women just reprobate sinners deserving no consideration? Even if true, the God of the Bible supposedly loves sinners. If Pro-Lifers are so concerned for life, where is their concern for the 500,000 women worldwide that die every year in childbirth? The Pro-Life moral inconsistency should be an embarrassment.

The idea that human life begins at conception is capricious religious speculation. That Catholic and Protestant theologians of this last century give themselves the authority to overrule the traditional Jewish interpretation that life begins at the first breath, the theology of the revered Augustine, and 1,200 years of papal judgment suggests a motive other than concern for life. These realizations combined with the fact that there is no scientific evidence to support the alleged ensoulment process or even presence of a human soul disqualifies this basic Pro-Life premise as a moral guideline for the beginning of life.

It is argued that all potential human life must be brought to birth. Human life is defined by the presence of human DNA. Male spermatozoa, the unfertilized female egg, as well as a fertilized egg all have the human DNA and all have the potential of becoming a human life. If the destruction of a potential human life is considered as murder than male ejaculation (nocturnal emission or masturbation) and female menstruation is murder. Denying basic human rights to women as the price for preservation of potential human life contradicts the very purpose of human life. This argument offers no practical moral guidance.

If the Bible is the guideline than human life begins when a fully formed infant takes its first breath (Gen 2:7). As in present day Israel, the fetus is not a human, thus abortion of a fetus is not murder. Since God designs a woman to miscarry or abort, calling abortion immoral equates to calling God immoral. Furthermore, if one believes in a loving God and an afterlife, would not aborted fetuses be better off with God and His heavenly family than with earthly parents?

The morals question boils down to individual responsibilities and one’s right to control their body. The Pro-Life position is anti-woman and pro-man. This should come as no surprise since the Pro-Life movement is the invention of the Roman Catholic Church, a decidedly patriarchal institution. The Pro-Life pregnant woman has no right to control her body, whereas an irresponsible Pro-Life man is free to continue his "horny" way whenever he feels the urge. The statement, "if men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament" says it all. Well, "What’s good for the goose is good for the gander." Any morally honest discussion to forbid a woman’s right to control her body as a consequence for pregnancy must include consequential laws for men's bodies. An appropriate consequence for man’s irresponsible or uninvited sexual activity is castration, particularly for clergymen and politicians who violate the public trust. Equal, respectful treatment of both sexes would prove the genuineness of those honestly concerned with morals. Until then, any discussion challenging a woman's right to control her own body is without moral foundation.

Meanwhile, since the Bible shows that God condones abortion and that human life begins after birth, a pregnant women must be respected, expecting that she will make the best decision for all concerned. Pro-life Christians must not be allowed to continue their manipulative, immoral campaign of inflicting religious guilt and dictatorial authority over pregnant women which in fact is nothing more than a deceptive guise to grasp political power.