I read on AlbertMohler.com that The New York Times reported on January 6, 2011 that the abortion rate in New York City is about 40 percent of all pregnancies and almost 60% of African American pregnancies…insert time to double-take… That means on average, more than two of every five pregnant women in the world’s most recognizable city choose to kill their babies. This is by far the most tragic statistic I’ve probably ever read.
I recall a conversation wherein my dad described abortion as the most unnatural and inhumane action a parent could ever perform. What is more basic than a parent’s instinct to protect her young? That’s even the most fundamental intuition among animals, since the survival of one’s offspring is essential to a species. A parent’s choosing her own life (especially when it is some ridiculously trivial aspect of life, like career, for example) over the existence of her child, is backwards, inhumane, and ultimately completely depravedly selfish. In no other case does a law permit a “choice” to end another human being’s life without his or her consent.
In October 2010, Dr. Mohler blogged about Dr. Mildred Jefferson, the first black woman to graduate from the Harvard Medical School, who was outspokenly against abortion and Roe v. Wade during her lifetime. She once summarized her sense of urgency to reverse the infamous case with these words: “I am at once a physician, a citizen and a woman, and I am not willing to stand aside and allow this concept of expendable human lives to turn this great land of ours into just another exclusive reservation where only the perfect, the privileged and the planned have the right to live.” In America, Planned Parenthood began because of the eugenics movement – the idea that people could breed a more superior race by preventing pregnancies and births of “less fit” the genes – a philosophy that had its roots in (though is also a distortion of) Darwin’s theory of Natural Selection, and a movement that was the basis of the Nazi Party’s practices in Germany.
Since abortion is the termination of an unwanted pregnancy, the real problem is, of course, adultery. People want to sin without consequences, so they try to kill and bury the consequence as if that itself will not have additional consequences.
That people can end the lives of their unborn children is unbelievable. That physicians who have taken an oath to “do no harm” can knowingly kill a living human being is unthinkable. That murder has been legalized by authorities who have sworn to protect the lives of citizens is deplorable. That the public has become desensitized to this wretched and foreboding practice is alarming.
What can we do to help those who are deceived into believing abortion is acceptable, or even the only way to “deal with” conceiving a child?
7 comments:
Abortion is murder. It is odd the way America has even changed the language to make this tragic thing sound less severe than it is. It began as Infanticide. That sounds bad......let's call it abortion. That sounds pretty bad too....how about pro-choice.....well, let's dress that up a bit, reproductive rights. Humh, I think we can even make this sound better, reproductive freedom. How did we get from infanticide to reproductive freedom?
As bad as all this is, something that makes it worse for some is that there is only one voice in the matter: the mother. The father has no say whatsoever. A woman can choose to kill a baby without the consent of the father! Wow, it sounds like some prophesy is about to be fulfilled.
At what point is it murder? The second trimester? The first? Conception? Is birth control murder? What about cases of incest or rape?
Blanket condemnations are easy but real life is harder. I'd love to see you put forth a fully-formed argument.
Nothing to say, Ali?
Yikes, it’s easy to be rude under the cloak of anonymity. Sorry, I’ve been a little busy this week. First of all, this blog is not named “Ali’s Fully-Formed Arguments,” so please don't expect so much from me, but I’ll clarify my position a bit. It seems most logical that life begins at conception, because that’s where the life-forming process from the dad and mom’s combining DNA begins. I used to naively believe that birth control in the form of a pill prevented conception, and three months before our wedding I took the doctor’s word for it that the pill was the only legitimate form of birth control that I needed to take. Since then I’ve been made aware that different pills do different things inside your body, some keeping the fertilized egg from landing, which seems kind of shady to me. However, before I found this out, I experienced crazy problems on various pills, and when I displayed stroke symptoms, by husband made me trash them all. I’ll put out there that even though condoms et al. prevent conception, it still kind of “plays God” in that it keeps nature from taking course, but you could argue that it’s God’s way of keeping us from worrying all the time, too. ☺
Incest and rape are incredibly tragic events that sometimes do produce a child. I’m not sure there are any numbers out there, but I’d guess those two situations make up a low, low percentage of abortions. Nevertheless, in a hypothetical situation of rape that I sometimes pondered when I was younger (is it normal to put yourself in awful worst-case scenarios like that?!), I decided I’d keep the child and put it up for adoption, but I’m not in any way shaking that off as an easy no-brainer. In incest I’m sure there would be health issues for the child, but is it then okay to kill any child when you see in the womb that it has a health problem (since science is making that more and more possible)?
Yes, putting others first, living with consequences of your actions, and making the best of it is hard. That’s why sex is best within marriage and anything otherwise is damaging physically, emotionally, and spiritually for both people involved, and certainly even more so for a child, who is the natural byproduct of sex.
Ali,
I appreciate the response. I did not mean to come off as rude, in fact, I rather enjoy reading your blog even if I do disagree with most of what you say.
As for being anonymous, that is a luxury reserved for those of us who don't have Facebook pages or blogs, either because we value our privacy or because we aren't sure the world needs to know our every thought. Or, in my case, both.
You, however, do have a blog. If you can't handle readers questioning your logic (particularly when you call friends or family members of mine murderers, without regard to the circumstances), I would suggest you make this blog private and only invite your friends who already agree with you. My guess is, however, that you see this blog as a way to "witness" to those who hold different beliefs than you.
If that is the case, you should know that casually throwing around words like "murder" will elicit a response from people like me. Another benefit of remaining anonymous is that it should make you think about who is reading your words. It could be a co-worker, a student, a friend, or a boss. You are probably okay with that, as you live for eternal life and not this worldly one, but saying such inflammatory things will doubtless have an effect on your career and relationships with those who don't agree.
On to your response. As I thought, you became much more reasonable when asked for specifics. Again, this is the problem with blanket condemnations. Instead of calling it murder, you say "If this happened to me, then I would choose to do this." What a more logical and defensible position!
To answer your question, no, it is not OK, in my view, to kill a fetus in the womb because it has a health problem. But I've never been in that position and I wouldn't presume to judge those who had to make such a difficult decision.
You go way off track again when you start making bombastic statements about sex.
sex is best within marriage and anything otherwise is damaging physically, emotionally, and spiritually for both people involved
I'll agree with you that the Bible says not to have sex outside of marriage, so it could be damaging spiritually.
I'll even admit that sex can *occasionally* be damaging emotionally, but that's true both inside of a marriage and out. The majority of the time, though, sex is an emotionally fulfulling act of love between two willing partners.
But physically damaging? Sex outside of marriage is damaging physically for both people involved? That's a new one to me. Do you know how many studies have shown the physical benefits of sex? And I'll presume that you don't have first-hand knowledge, so how would you know?
I wouldn't normally comment on your blog, but it drives me crazy when intelligent (which you clearly are) fundamentalists (which you also clearly are) make such ridiculous statements about legal actions with which they have no experience.
If you want to get into technicalities, emotional damage has a physical effect on the body. Emotional damage is physically damaging to the body as well. Simply put, mental health affects physical health.
So, I'd advise not tearing apart the innocent defense to a seemingly abrasive comment without first having your facts stright.
Let's call apples, apples and murder, murder. The blood of Jesus has power to wash away all sin. No condemnation: love the sinner but hate the sin. A murderer can be forgiven, and many are. Tying a pretty pink bow around the term abortion and stating that it is a legal action doesn't make it right. All will stand before God and give an account for what they've done.
Anon. #1 (I'm assuming the 2nd comment was another person?), Thanks for your comments and explanations. The written word often lacks a person's tone, so I apologize that I misread you - it was mostly the 2nd comment a few days later that felt like badgering. You've rightly called me to consider why in the world I blog, which I think will be my next snow day (tomorrow?) blog. Hopefully it's not all narcissism! :) You've also made me evaluate how I portray my thoughts - I sometimes wrongly assume the reader understands my intentions and therefore I tend to leave out links in my logical train (causing confusion or misinterpretation) - so I'll work on being more specific and clear in the future.
For example, in my above comment, I assumed that a physical consequence of sex outside of marriage is STDs, but I didn't clarify that. (Trying not to assume anything) I'm aware that STDs aren't transferred with each instance, but they wouldn't be in existence at all if people only had sex with their spouse. A pregnancy is also a physical consequence of sex.
Something that I accidentally left out in the blog and my comment above was how incredible adoption is. A friend of mine when a senior in high school let a couple who couldn't conceive adopt her baby, and therefore turned what was a horrible situation to her into the biggest blessing she could give someone. There are so many people who can't have children, and apparently the waiting list for adoption is crazy.
It grieves me that many girls/women who are pregnant out of wedlock think they have no option but to abort; there need to be more people out there proclaiming the ugly truth that abortion is ending a life, and instead a mother could give her child to someone who desperately wants him/her and thereby do a wonderfully good thing!
Don't get me wrong: as a Christian (you pegged me fundamentalist, and I would agree as long as we have the same definition among many, ha!), I'm not "passing judgment" as if I'm not just as much deserving of hell as anybody else; I'm just calling a thing what it is. God forgives any and all sins of those who cling to Christ as their Savior, there is none too good nor too bad for the sweet relief of God's grace.
Post a Comment