The use of force for the sake of the unborn

[N0X3x]

What conditions, if any exist, would have to be met in order for the use of force in the abortion battle to be justified?

 

[N0X3x]

Whoops. I thought I was posting in the “moral theology” forum. Is it possible to move threads?

 

[anruari]

The just use of force requires legitimate authority. That means a government agency such as the police would have the right to use force to defend life. But that in turn requires that laws are passed to make abortions illegal.

Another requdisobedience. at you have reasonable chance of success. The user of force against one abortionist or clinic would simply result in their customers going to an alternative clinic so success would be impossible due to violent civil dissobedience.

Now if there was a situation where a mother was being coerced or forced against her will to have an abortion and you were able to rescue her with her express consent then it may be that the situation could exist where force became justifiable. … But that’s a very different scenario.

 

[4love2God]

Anruari states : **The just use of force requires legitimate authority. That means a government agency such as the police would have the right to use force [but not a non-cop]."
**
I wonder what he defines “Just” as.
If I see someone standing on a ledge, and he is about ready to jump off, I don’t need to wait until a cop arrives.
I (if I chose to) would be justified in forcefully yanking that person off of the ledge (whether or not that would be legal according to a Law).
There are many critical situations in Life where it seems to me to justify the use of force (if someone chooses to use it).

The conversation seems to be about inflicting force against some participant of abortion.
Though un-mentioned, it seems like : Can we use force on an abortionist?

OK, let’s run through it :
(A) She decides that God has given her the authority to prevent future murdering by that abortionist;
(B) A person is sure that she is acting under the “Authority” of God, and Jesus and the Holy Spirit (bigger than civil authority); and
(C) The only way to prevent those future murders is do something so that this murderer cannot murder any more.

The options (may) break down to

1. Mangle his hands, so he can’t use those tools of Death;
2. Scare him into refusing to murder; or
3. Kill him.

At this point, things boils down to : Is the civil authority ALWAYS right, and therefore, we must ALWAYS follow its dictates?
And, even if a two-minute scene happens, it IS only one Sin.
God will forgive us for all of our Sins, especially when we repent of that Sin.

So, a person wonders if using force to prevent future murders is acceptable.
Several people have spoken … some with the old “Respect all Laws.”
Not too many years ago, laws against Black people were pretty onerous. Slavery was the Law of the Land.
Many Christians resisted that law.
I do not believe that God took their civilly un-lawful actions as a rebellion against authority (and condemned them to Hell for it).

Some laws are just morally wrong to certain people.
And, if we are in a quandry about who to follow: GOD … or … Man
The majority of the responses say: Man knows what it is Right, so ignore your duty to God.
Hmm.

 

[N0X3x]

To a certain extent, I agree with you, 4love2God. It seems that there are some circumstances when the use of force to oppose the authorities is justified, and has been justified throughout history. The principle question is whether or not abortions fit into this category now, could possibly at some point in the future, or could not ever possibly fit into this category. Though I also think that there are other, more effective ways to prevent abortions by force other than harming the abortionist somehow. For example, an organized underground group could synchronize a forced evacuation of abortion clinics around the nation, and then blow up the abortion clinics. If possible, this action would more effectively minimize abortions, and no one would be physically harmed.