|
| Rethinking the Abortion Debate |
|
| |
The other night I was watching an interview with Bill O’Reilly and the editor of Salon Magazine, Joan Walsh. She was asked her thoughts regarding the murder of the abortion doctor, Dr. Tiller. Like any thinking person she rightly denounced the murder. After her denouncement, however, O’Rielly, probed her further regarding what she thought of him as a person. Shockingly, she deemed a hero. That is an interesting comment from someone in her position. Dr. Tiller, a Mengelaesque character, has performed hundreds of late term abortions. How can a procedure so obviously heinous be accepted by so many people? The problem is how the debate is framed. Feminists and Leftist have framed the debate in such a way as to vilify those who want to protect life, and at the same time position themselves as being ones who are protecting the rights of women. Unfortunately, even liberal Christians, like Christians of old who supported slavery over a hundred years ago, are now helping to further the abortion cause. In this blog I would like to look at two significant court cases that I believe to be of crucial importance when framing this debate. The first court case is the Dred-Scott case. In this case the court held that Scott, who had moved with his master from a slave state to a free state, had no right to sue for his freedom. It was thought that Africans had no rights under the US Constitution. Whether they were slaves or free did not matter. It was further ruled that neither Congress nor territorial governments had the authority to prohibit slavery in the territories. What this decision did was give government approval to white supremacy. There were even conservative denominations backing such a deplorable law. Today, such an act in America would be denounced by Whites and Blacks alike because the stigma of white supremacy has been firmly established, and rightly so, in this country. It would be unthinkable to vote for someone who would say that the decision reached in the Dred-Scott case should be upheld. No one would think of asking, “I know that he advocates White Supremacy, but what are his views on other issues like the economy, the War in Iraq, etc. For today’s voter, it wouldn’t matter because that candidate has already confirmed that a certain group of people were less than human and did not have a right of self-determination. The second court case is of course Roe vs. Wade. “The central holding of Roe v. Wade was that abortions are permissible for any reason a woman chooses, up until the point at which the fetus becomes ‘viable,’ that is, potentially able to live outside the mother's womb, albeit with artificial aid.” The rationale is that an unborn baby is not fully human, and therefore, has no constitutional protection under the law. It is relegated to a mere blob of tissue and can be disposed of for any reason the mother chooses. As a Christian, it would be very difficult to arrive at such a view. The Bible it very clear that God is the author of human life and the Bible affirms that life begins at conception. This being so, from a Christian perspective, there is no fundamental difference between a mother disposing of a child, whether it be prenatal or postnatal. Unfortunately this stigma of this horrific act has not been established in America. The left in general and the feminist movement and Planned Parenthood in particular has made sure that the pro-abortion position is presented in such a way that people would have a favorable outlook on the position. Arguments such as a woman’s right to choose, or so called reproductive rights are thrown out a somehow being rational arguments. What has been amazing is that the founder of Planned Parenthood, Margret Sanger, promoted the idea of race hygiene, and the fundamental way for that to happen was through abortion. Yet, Planned Parenthood is still a respected institution by many in American society. The reason why the pro-abortionist has been successful is because they have framed the debate in such a way so the central question is never addressed, namely whether the baby in the womb is a living person or not. It is my prayer that millions in America would rethink their position, and look at this issue rationally. We can’t afford to have another fifty million babies murdered. |
|
| To add a comment to "Rethinking the Abortion Debate" |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| June 14, 2009 |
 |
|
|
[star!] | The "prince" of this world has blinded them to the truth, b/c they don't want the truth. |
|
|
| June 14, 2009 |
 |
|
|
[star!] |
Secular courts framing the issues, is it any wonder the human perspective rules in this country rather than a divine one? |
|
|
| June 14, 2009 |
 |
|
|
Lara, you are so right. It is a spiritual battle and prayer is a big part of winning that battle.. Mike, great point! G K Chesterton once said, "The danger of disbelieving in God is not that you will believe in nothing. It is much worse. The danger of disbelieving in God is that you will believe anything." With no theistic point of reference, one is able to justify about anything, no matter how heinous . |
|
|
| June 15, 2009 |
 |
|
|
[star!] | I think many people have heard me speak on this situation. I don't believe Christians are doing enough to stop these crimes. They say that the man who killed Tiller "murdered" him. I know it may be "over the top" to say. The murderer Tiller was stopped from committing another murder. It is simple defence of the unborn. If the child was out of the mother and two years old. we would be told it was justified to kill Tiller. It is perhaps shameful to talk this way. I don't know. They claim you can't have a vigilante law. Well, if your country refuses to protect the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Does not this responsibility belong to the people? It is a debate that may be a heated one. But, I am tired of my country, of which I fought and bled on foreign soil for these rights. Turn there backs on those who have no say of their defence. |
|
|
| June 15, 2009 |
 |
|
|
| To Golden: I'm not saying your wrong, but I am reminded of what Jesus said when Peter drew his sword to protect the innocent, "all who draw the sword will die by the sword." |
|
|
| June 15, 2009 |
 |
|
|
Well, Mike, or Laura. you have a right to be a pacifist if you so desire. What happened in that Garden is not even near this subject. But, I don't want to digress all day. This is supposed to be a nation of laws. It is the Liberals and those who would rather lie down and be killed than fight for their rights that hurt our Republic. The second amendment was modeled after the Magna Carta. A very strong document about the duty of a true citizenry. You claim to respect our servicemen and woman. They are fighting for our rights. What we have left. Should they "die by the sward?" Should we abandon all law? That is what is happening. God is not in favor of murders, nor those who protect them. Being passive is not a help to this Christian nation. Please don't take offence. I have very strong views of the rights in this nation. Over forty years ago, I offered my very life for liberty. I would do so at any time again. |
|
|
| June 15, 2009 |
 |
|
|
I don't think Mike is advocating passivity here, but Christian civility. We are to advance God's Kingdom by acquiescing to God's Kingdom principles, and not the worlds.
18:36 Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence. |
|
|
| June 15, 2009 |
 |
|
|
| Mike n Laura, the scripture you are referring to is found in Matthew, Luke, and John and it was in referrence to His arrest and subsequence crucifiction. Jesus knew that it was time for Him to drink of the cup that His Father had for Him and He was obedient to it. |
|
|
| June 18, 2009 |
 |
|
|
I would certainly like to add, in my own defence. As I'm sure I will need to as others read this blog. Let's take the word that the media has so many people upset wi If you have a Websters New World Dictionary look the word up. Let's go to the prime- vigilance The quality or state of being vigilant; watchfulness: vigilance committee a group organized outside of legal authority to keep order and punish crime because the usual law-enforcement agencies do not exist or are alleged to be inefficient. Now, I'll go one down to "vigilante' a member of a vigilance committee. This leads to a wrd used a good deal "vigilantism" the lawless, violent methods, spirit, etc, of vigelanties.
This government which is supposed to be governed by the constitution is making laws that do not conform to this document. This makes it a "non-law" Yet, we are thrown in jail if we break one of these laws which are unjust. I'm not going to go into a complete list of ;un-laws But, in the case of abortion. A murder of a child which has no say into weather they want to live or not. A law exists that allows this murder for just about ANY reason. The child's life is taken without due process of law. What did they do to deserve capital punishment? They have not even had a chance to J-walk. The courts have given these murderers the right ot be judge, jury, and executioner. This of course is unconstitutional, to say the least. Just like, they gave the Fed the power to print our money. Only congress can set, or regulate the value of our coinage. This is treason. It has existed sense 1913 and not one president has even tried to change it. There is much, much more. So, those who think it is wrong to protect our children from murder. Think about it. Many times a person is charged with two murders when a woman and her baby are murdered at the same time while she is pregnant. So, they can decide when the baby is a life, and when it's nothing. We have a DUTY to take over the positions of our so-called law makers and align the law correctly. I hope it does not come to a war. But, if it does and I see some silly passive Christian in front of me. Get out of the way, because you're going down with the rest of the snakes!! |
|
|