Friday, October 16, 2009

I Still Don't Understand

"But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea...Take heed that ye despise not one of these little ones; for I say unto you, That in heaven their angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in heaven... Even so it is not the will of your Father which is in heaven, that one of these little ones should perish." Matthew 18:6, 10, and 14

In my previous post, I stated I don't understand how Christians can support politicians who support abortion. I made my case.

Not only did I post it here on my blog, I also posted it as a Facebook note on my Facebook page. It was there that I received a response from the Liberal Christian point of view.

I said it was a response. It was not a convincing explanation of why some Christians embrace the "right to choose" ideology.

My Doctor Professor nephew Kevin (Liberal) attempted to enlighten me, but in my opinion, fell woefully short, which is somewhat surprising, since he is a college professor with a doctorate and everything. I would think he could have been much more convincing. Perhaps he doesn't believe his explanation himself. In the interest of brevity, I will spare both of my readers the entire exhaustive response he wrote.

I would like, however, to paste an excerpt or two from his diatribe so that my two readers will better understand my response to him which I have inserted in their entirety below.

My Doctor nephew Kevin said this first:

When I saw the title "What I Don't Understand," I knew that this would have to be a long Facebook note!

Bwah ha ha ha ha!

Just kidding. I know, this is a serious issue, but I just had to throw in a little (probably inappropriate) levity.

OK, that was funny, I admit. But then he went all Liberal on me, writing, among other things,

I do find myself wishing that anti-abortion conservatives would put as much energy into fighting other violations of the sanctity of life as they do into fighting for the criminalization of abortion... all they seem interested in is making sure that all these aborted fetuses get born, but when it comes to supporting them with things like healthcare, childcare, early childhood education, safe and affordable housing, job training and creation for the child's parents, public education, after-school programs, financial aid for poor teens seeking college education, etc., these conservative voices suddenly sing a very anti-life tune. I won't even get into how fiercely these so-called "pro-life" advocates support things like war, the death penalty, and all manner of practices that destroy the environment and threaten all of God's Creation.

That's just a teeny snippet of the response I received. I can't paste the entire conversation here. This post is already much too long. But, another relative of mine, my niece Lori, daughter of a different sibling, wrote, among other things, the following:

"First of all I'd like to say, Sorry Mom, but here is how I feel". (She is my sister's daughter, which makes me proud to know, at least my sister is against abortion)

Anyway, she also defended abortion but without presenting a convincing or logical argument. However, she can be excused for her inability to articulate her thoughts coherently. My nephew can't. He is a genius. Really.

She went on to write, "I do want to ask you to stop indicating that I am not a Christian just because I don't agree with you or because I voted for Obama."

Both Niece and Nephew mentioned an opposition to the death penalty, saying, in so many words, they believe execution to be inhumane.

Although my first response to Kevin's comments are (if I may say so myself) quite logical and well thought out, and should have been convincing, I will not post it here. This is my second response to their first responses:

(First statement responding to Niece Lori's assertion that I accused her of not being a Christian)"It is not my place to say whether anyone is a Christian or not, and I didn't. I said I don't understand how one can call himself a Christian and support the mass murder of innocent babies. I then said I know there are Christians that do. And, I am absolutely convinced that they are indeed Christians. As I said, I don't understand it, and I am still waiting for someone to explain it to me logically.

While I admire and respect Kevin for his intellect and education, I don't believe he is being intellectually honest in responding to my note. Common sense tells us that in order for a child to have a chance at a better education, a more fulfilling childhood, better childcare, better health care, job training etc, he must first have a chance at life. What chance does a dead baby have at any of those things?

Don't misunderstand me. I believe a woman has the right to choose. She has the right to choose to keep her pants on. She has the right to choose not to have pre-marital sex, or at least act wisely before she's ready to have a child. She has the right to choose abstinence. She also has the right to make lifestyle choices all the way from her own birth to her death. All decisions have consequences. Some have more consequences than others. Some have good consequences. Some have unfortunate consequences, but all decisions result in some form of consequences.

When one makes a decision, one must be prepared for the consequences involved in making that decision. If one is not capable of dealing with unfortunate consequences, than one should not make that decision. If a woman makes the unfortunate decision to do something that causes her to end up pregnant when she doesn't want to be pregnant, she doesn't get to take a mulligan. She must live with the consequences of her decision. That's called taking personal responsibility.

Now, before I am challenged with the inevitable question about cases of rape and incest, my answer remains the same. There is never an intellectually honest reason to abort a living human child. If a woman is raped, why punish the baby with execution? That doesn't make sense. If a woman becomes pregnant due to an incestuous relationship either with her consent or without, again I say, why punish the baby with execution? In neither case is the pregnancy the baby's fault.

Again, it's all about personal responsibility. Put it this way...If a two year old child suffers some calamity and is left permanently disabled as a result, would it be right for the child's parents to put the child to death to avoid taking responsibility for the care and nurturing of that child? Of course it wouldn't.

With abortion we have the exact same scenario with the only exception being that of the child's physical age. It is punishing the innocent so that the responsible party can spare himself a modicum of inconvenience. That is NOT taking personal responsibility.

I also find it dichotomous for one to object to executing a murderer on grounds that it is inhumane but doesn't have a problem killing unborn children who have done nothing to deserve death save being an inconvenience to his mother.

A murderer committed a crime. He deserves whatever punishment he gets for his transgressions. As I say, if he didn't want to face a just punishment, he shouldn't have committed the crime. After all, he most likely knows what would likely happen to him if he gets caught. And still he decides to commit the crime. How many people would he have to kill before his defenders would say he deserves what he gets?

If it is inhumane to take his life, how much more inhumane is it to take the life of a perfectly innocent baby?

And what about war? Is it inhumane to defend one's country against murderous savages who have every intention of wiping our country off the face of the earth? Again, which killing is more moral? The killing of a mortal enemy who will kill you or your family if not killed first, or killing an innocent baby in the womb before he has the chance to choose whether he wants to be a murderer or a terrorist or a brain surgeon or a teacher, etc?

It seems to me one does not have much faith in God or your fellow man if you think an unborn child doesn't stand any chance just because he may happen to be unwanted. the world is full of people who beat the odds to become successful in a veritable plethora of endeavors. They are written about in songs and in legends.

Why not give the innocent unborn child the opportunity to become someone.

Why not give him or her a chance?


I still don't get the logic".

15 comments:

4simpsons said...

Your nephew trots out the canard that pro-lifers don't care about humans after they are born. That is wrong on many levels.

1. You don't have to take full responsibility for a situation to protest its immorality.

Tell him to consider the hypothetical situation of the government slaughtering homeless people to accomplish the goal of reducing homelessness. Could he oppose that without having to feed, clothe and house any or all of the homeless people himself?

2. Pro-lifers do plenty to help the children and families. Go check out a Crisis Pregnancy Center. Most are run purely on donations and largely with volunteers. They help women and children in many ways, all for free. They outnumber abortion clinics.

How many Planned Parenthood locations do that, let alone with donations instead of government funding?

3. Does he think pro-lifers wouldn't also protest the slaughter of toddlers? We are merely defending the human beings whose lives are threatened.

4. Unless he is pro-abortion and insists that poor or un-wed mothers must have abortions or give up children for adoption, then he is just as culpable for his claims that we must help the children after they are born. After all, pro-choicers insist that either choice is acceptable. Therefore, they have the same moral obligation to give as much help as they expect the pro-lifers to.

Trader Rick said...

Christians and Jews believe they are not supposed to commit murder. Abortion is murder. Murder is murder. Executions and warfare are not murder.

Most Rev. Gregori said...

Mark, Please explain to me how one can be Christian if they openly support abortion, perform an abortion or assist at an abortion?

Also if Holy Scripture, both Old and New Testaments, condemn homosexuality, then how can any "Christian Church" that performs same-sex unions or marriages call themselves "Christian"?

I have read the bible from front to back many times, I have studied Theology, Christology, etc., and nowhere can I find that Jesus ever said that we can pick and choose what we wish to believe. If I am wrong, then please show me.

I find it rather ludicrous, that so many so-called "Christians" are strongly against the execution of convicted murders, rapists and kidnappers, claiming it is murder, yet those same "Christians" are just as strongly in favor of murdering innocent unborn children.

Mark said...

Father, I don't know. That's the whole point of the post. How can Christians support abortion?

Marshall Art said...

As a hard-core pro-lifer, I agree that there is no logic regarding the Christian who supports a pro-abortion candidate (not "pro-choice"---that is an inaccurate label for what is happening---from the moment of conception, that zygote is choosing life). But let me offer what might be the only possibility that could fall under the heading "logical explanation".

The marketing suggests that a woman is in a position whereby only she should be allowed the privilege or obligation of making the decision at all, it being "her body". We are all, we who are Christians, created with the right to choose. We choose between living on God's terms or our own. Thus, it is "Christian" to allow a woman to make her choice in the matter of abortion.

Of course the obvious rejoinder involves the rest of us having similar options allowed, including all manner of other sin involving the taking of another's life.

It all comes down to what or who is being aborted. Is it a person or isn't it? If not, there's no issue. If it is, & all reasonable, honest people know it is indeed a human being and a person equal to any of us post-womb individuals, then that life deserves the very same Constitutional protection as any one of us.

To say it again, there is no logical explanation for a Christian to support a pro-abortion candidate.

I will say, however, that I disagree that it might not matter with lower level candidates as to what their positions on the issue might be. Holding one office, and not doing so in a completely incompetent manner, gives one a bit of an easier time attaining a higher office. So if that guy running for dog catcher is pro-abortion, it may not matter in his role as dog catcher, but as he rises (if it's possible for him), he joins those of whom others wonder whether that issue should make or break his campaign.

In addition, and more importantly, I think part of the reason that abortion is the issue it is is due to the overall lowering of societal standards. It has led to all the behaviors that then lead to the sinfully perceived "need" for "abortion rights". For those of us who take our right to vote seriously, to say nothing of our belief in God Almighty, it seems to me we have an obligation to effect whatever change we can through our votes that will move us back toward a more moral society.

Keep in mind that this is not to say that America was ever totally Eden before the Fall. But there was at least a more solid understanding of right and wrong as regards human sexuality, and it did have an effect on society. Virgins of both sexes were in higher percentages 100 years ago, and divorce was not as common. The idea of "'till death do us part" had more meaning and the idea of what a vow is was taken more seriously.

If it comes out that that candidate for dog catcher is pro-abortion, vote for his opponent.

Lone Ranger said...

Democrats made exactly the same case when they were arguing against the criminalization of slavery. Don't Repubiclans have better things to do than fight against something that is legal? "Liberal Christian" is an oxymoron. You can't distance yourself from a sin and then claim that you are not sinning. If you are an abortionist, you are a baby killer. If you are a woman who seeks an abortion, you are seeking the murder of your child. If you vote for a politician who does not actively work against abortion, you are voting for someone who is ambivalent about baby-killing.

I've often said I wish there were a roller coaster-cam at the entrance to hell, so we could see the expression on the faces of all those liberal Christians.

Joe said...

"I still don't get the logic"

That's because liberals do not require logic to come to a conclusion about a matter...any matter.

There first and foremost consideration is themselves, their convenience, comfort and their conscience, which they think they can salve by providing for others rather than teaching others how to provide for themselves.

Certainly they have to know that the DNA of the "fetus" proves that he/she is human. No "fetus" in history has had any other kind of DNA.

It also proves that he/she is not the same human being as his/her mother. Therefore what a mother or "doctor" does to that fetus is not doing it to the mother.

So, out goes the argument that a woman should be able to do what she wants with her own body.

Add to that the fact that the sanctity of life is a tenet of both our Declaration of Independence and our Constitution, and you lose the argument that the government should be able to tell us that abortion is OK.

In 67 years of life, I have never met a liberal who was as compassionate about helping others as the least of the conservatives I've met...not one, and I have lived all over the Americas and Europe.

One's relationship to Christ is dependent upon confessing that He is God, and believing that God has raised Him from the dead. It also involves loving what He loved. And He said, "Suffer the little children to come unto me and forbid them not, for of such is the Kingdom of Heaven."

On an emotional level, did you ever hear a loving mother or her doctor remark, "I can feel my little blob of tissue kicking?" or "What sex is my little blob of tissue?" or "Here, would you like to hear your little blob of tissue's heart beating?"

What total fools even the most "intelligent" liberals are!

Tonto said...

I think we should change the argument against abortion from pro-life to arguing abortion as an archaic. It is an archaic way to do something that can be prevented much easier on the woman and of course not kill the baby...i.e. we have better technology and there is NO NEED to have abortions at this point in time. There is the morning after pill which is just a heavy dose of BC pills.

But it would require a change for pro-lifers - in that BC would have to be encouraged and given out free in all its forms at a very young age. The epedemic in UTAH of babies born to teens is awful because BC is so taboo.

Abortion is a horrible procedure for women aside from the obvious death of the baby.

I think abortion medical procedures should be argued as outdated and we move toward making a medical abortion seem ridiculous and too intrusive into the woman's body and maybe more people would think that is one good reason to move away from abortion.

Tonto said...

I think your question works in reverse too.

Can you be against abortion at the same time support the death penalty? I support neither, because I think otherwise is intellectually inconsistent.

Trader Rick said...

Tonto's intellect fails her here. Unborn babies are innocent. Adults are held responsible for their actions.

barry O'Bam-Mao said...

r u takin a break???

Marshall Art said...

Tonto's logic fails even worse than T-Rick suggested. BC and morning after pills very often cause a miscarriage of a viable embryo. Therefor, it is NOT a contraceptive at all, but is in fact a chemical abortion.

There is really only one true way to prevent the need for abortions, aside from surgically removing the ability to reproduce. But that would require self-control and good gosh, who wants to do that? Yet, somehow, that is the most Christian way to do it. Controlling one's base desires for a higher purpose, denying one's self for a greater good. Naw. Too tough for the horny. Deny that brief spasm? Far better to kill any kid conceived as a result. Yeah. That's the freakin' ticket.

lohit said...

I an not a Christian, yet i would like to comment.
I am a Doctor, as an intern in India i was part of teams which conduct abortions.
Whether it is RIGHT OR WRONG-MY OPINION-
We have seen patients from 16 year old unmarried to 35 year old married women. Each case of Pregnancy is a different story, so we have to assess each case individually.
Scenario 1) "A young unmarried women walks in to say, I want to get rid of the mistake i made"- WELL it not a MISTAKE it was Conscious Wrong Doing on her part knowing what can be the result of having SEX. With respect to these cases if the lady is Medically fit to go on with Pregnancy she not be given a chance to undergo Abortion. By this she will learn that our ancestors who evolved over 5000-8000 years were no fools to lay ground rules for Sex and Something called Marriage. If a women is made go through this, it not only her learning a lesson but her peer group and others girls to will be influenced.

2) "A Unmarried women forced into Sexual counter, comes for abortion" With this case just get done the TESTS and make her ready for ABORTION within Next Day. There should be no second thought with this scenario.

3) "A married couple coming for abortion as they are not ready yet" HOW IN the hell were they ready to have Sex and not a Child. Just turn them back, they will send message to other couples to be safe or marry when they were ready.

4) "A married couple with kids, with an unexpected pregnancy because of contraceptive failure" Just make the patient ready for Abortion, otherwise they along with the baby will suffer all along the life.

5) "A married couple with no resources for Child care, already with kids, Request for abortion" Just tell the patient they will be sterilized along with Abortion for better life for them and already born children.

6) "A married women with Extramarital affair pregnancy" just never allow her to have a Abortion, she has cheated which is actually a crime and giving a Abortion will encourage her to keep CHEATING.

7) "A WIDOW with an unwanted pregnancy" This is the most difficult situation. She cant be denied of her right to have Sex, at the same time she cant be allowed to make a man cheat his wife will having Sex with widow. If pregnancy due to a Married man deny her of Abortion, If the pregnancy is from a Non married person let her undergo the Abortion

These are few Patient scenarios i have come across my Medical life till now, and these are my opinion. I mean not to offend anyone,these are my opinion which can differ from yours, yet i feel our Ancestors who built the Civilizations were no fools, they have been in the same situation before and they came up with the ideas to prevent mistakes from occuring.

I feel the Righteous people at top in Church, Politics, Business should promote the Prolife movement with Rules down for each SCENARIO differently.

Being an Indian, 25 year old, it hurts me to see INDIA is starting to go in the path of AMERICA, I have browsed through internet for life in America, I feel sorry to say "THERE IS NO BASIC STRUCTURE AMERICAN NATION IS BUILT ON, Marriages have become a Mockery, People have Sex like Animals with no inhibitions and Feeling, and the FAMILY LIFE has almost come to a crisis". I feel very sorry even my nation is just behind the America in the race to disintegration and Random chaos of Individual minds and wishes.

lohit said...

WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT ON THESE LINES OF YOU- "If a woman becomes pregnant due to an incestuous relationship either with her consent or without, again I say, why punish the baby with execution? In neither case is the pregnancy the baby's fault"

Well Pregnancy and child birth is not a momentary situation, it takes 38+/- weeks for a life to be born.

When a women is Raped, she has gone through a trauma which cannot be overcome even with whole Life time. She will be devastated psychologically by the very act of Rape. If in this situation she comes to know, there is product of the trauma in her it would add to her misery.

Getting Pregnant should be a joy full event to any women, it is something which makes her life more meaningful. In India if a Women gets pregnant, it is a festival for the family, at the end of Second term the whole people ever in contact are invited to bless her and the yet Unborn baby. This may be true in every other civilizations. The very act above shows how important the whole situation of pregnancy is for women and her people.

When pregnancy that means so much for a women,results from something which she hated the most, how can she love the pregnancy. All her love will be turned into a pile of misery and hatred towards herself.

"SHE SHOULD BE ALLOWED FOR ABORTION? As i started the comment, Pregnancy is process its not event like Delivery. The women has to carry a product of her hatred, and every moment she carries it, she will add hatred to herself.
It not just the pregnancy period, what will happen if the baby is born, will she able to care someone who was a result of assault on her.

Live the baby for a moment, would a Conservative man like you and me like to marry a women and also look after the baby. Well it easy to say yes, but it will haunt everyone the Women, the new Man and the baby.

What will be the status of mind, when a teenager comes to know he was born out of a assault and not a life given with LOVE."

With Respect, your view on Against abortion for a Raped women concerns only the unborn baby and not the women. Women is a person already alive, why would you like to push her into much more misery and pain for something which is yet to arrive and which she never expected. Every pregnancy carries a risk of death to women( more than abortion), why would you want a women to die for something she does not want. Also what about her future life.

I WOULD LIKE your comments for this, Yes baby may be important but not as important as the mother, So mother should get to say. When you justify defense in war, why not let the MOTHER defend herself from further pain, agony, risk of death and suffering.

HOPE U COMMENT!

lohit said...

@TONTO your suggestion of the "After Sex pills" is good with respect to prevent pregnancy. But that would encourage the females to have more Premarital Sex and there will be another era of Sex rampage initiated. Already we are seeing it in India, thanks to Pro-western ideology media in India encouraging it. MOST LAME THING ABOUT INDIA IS THAT- a company markets it as UNWANTED-72 and it advertises openly like a over the counter drug.

I am a person with ideology against Pre-Marital sex, people have commented over time sex is just fun, virginity is not a commodity and marriage is based on only Love. Well i have only one thing to say them, these people then should never expect their partners to be faithful to them when in relation or marriage because sex was just fun nothing related to love for them.

@Marshall "After Sex" pills mostly work by inhibiting the OVULATION, there is a new theory of it preventing the implantation but its not proven.
What the drug does is, it prevents the ovary from releasing the OVA or egg into the fallopian tube, no ova no fertilization, so no embryo. If the ovulation has already occurred within last 24 hours then there is risk of getting pregnant, only in this situation the proposed new theory can cause non implantation of embryo.

So people who are not against Premarital Sex but against the abortion, should support the AFTER SEX PILLS, people against the Premarital sex should know this will encourage young people to have sex with very little fear of getting pregnant.