Religion doesn’t justify pro-life policy

I’ve made a secular focused case for the morality of abortion, but did not mention religion.

I concluded that before 20, 24 weeks into pregnancy, there’s not even a reasonable argument for abortion being unethical; at least not in the sense that destroying that life is anywhere near equivalent to murdering a human. I said that between that time and birth is more of a gray area.

But what about a religious argument?

First, if the only good argument for an action being unethical is a religious one, then the government absolutely should not ban or discourage that action. We don’t live in a theocracy. We have a clear separation between church and state. If I need to believe a religious doctrine in order to think something is wrong, then a law banning it is an act of establishing religion.

Even if multiple religions share a belief, there will be others, including non-religion, that don’t. So, to enforce such a rule would be to use the power of government to force one’s spiritual beliefs on others. That’s wrong.

This isn’t to say that one can’t choose their personal beliefs based on religion, or even their political attitudes. For a truly religion person, all their morals should come from their religious beliefs. I’d expect that to influence their political opinions. But…if we believe in a separation of state and church, then we can’t force those beliefs and opinions on others. There must be a solid non-religious argument that matches the…