Abortion

-
As we face a presidential election I wanted to post a weigh-in on the abortion rights issue. I will never vote for a pro-choice candidate.

It seems clear enough to me from common sense and from a passage of Scripture in Exodus 21:22-25:

When men strive together and hit a pregnant woman, so that her children come out, but there is no harm, the one who hit her shall surely be fined, as the woman's husband shall impose on him, and he shall pay as the judges determine. But if there is harm, then you shall pay life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.


An unborn baby is stated to have “life.” This life is protected by the same penalty imposed on a person who commits murder. That seems clear enough to solve the moral dilemma.

I have outlined an argument elsewhere that ethical issues become a matter of interpreting what the Bible says on a given issue. The short version is that Christ established the authority of the Bible by His words and actions. The verses above are clear enough. The argument is well made in the audio lectures here, and more material can be found here.

Let’s analyze a quote for an abortion rights advocate.

"Abortion should be legal; it is sometimes even necessary. Sometimes the mother must be able to decide that the fetus, in its full humanity, must die. But it is never right or necessary to minimize the value of the lives involved or the sacrifice incurred in letting them go. Only if we uphold abortion rights within a matrix of individual conscience, atonement and responsibility can we both correct the logical and ethical absurdity in our position and consolidate the support of the center.” - Naomi Wolf, staunch pro-abortion feminist in The New Republic

The quote above seems a startling admission to me. A fetus is given the status of “full humanity,” that, under certain circumstances, “must die.” The “ethical absurdity” of the moral position is admitted. An implication is made that abortion needs “atonement,” payment for a sin.

As an adoptive parent, I cannot stand the fact that my daughter would have been deemed by some as a necessary candidate for abortion. No unexpected pregnancy happens in anything like ideal circumstances. My daughter’s birth-mom made a difficult decision in a moral environment that in many ways did not support her. (One day when my daughter is old enough to understand her birth-mom’s situation she may decide to share those circumstances, but for now I’ll leave that to your imagination.)

My father was adopted. My grandmother on Mom’s side of the family was also adopted. I would not be here without the gift of adoption. My life as a son and as a father would not have been possible if any one of three decisions were made in favor of abortion.

It becomes a personal and passionate issue with me. I will not vote for or endorse or support in any way a candidate for office who is pro-choice. I just can’t do it.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Face of Terror

-
Osama Bin laden is dead. Since the rest of the internet is buzzing with opinions on that death, I thought I would weigh in. First, this is not the end of global terrorism. Like the Hydra of old, when one head is chopped off, two more take its place. We still need diligence in our fight against global terror. U. S. and allied Armed Forces still need our prayers. We still need a strong military and intelligence community. We have not yet cut off the Hydra’s immortal head. Second, the way to get to the ‘heart of the matter’ is with Christian missionary efforts. We must reach the people who make up those societies and population segments that produce terrorists . To tell a story I have told here before : Early in the twentieth century, Baptist evangelists preached through rural Mississippi and Alabama with such effectiveness that moonshiners could no longer sell their whiskey: All their customers were getting converted! In desperation, the whiskey sellers hired two men to murder on
Read more

The Canons of Dort

-
I believe that the Canons of Dort are true. This is a statement that came out the Synod of Dort, held from 1618-1619. The Canons of Dort outline the system of theology known today as the “five points of Calvinism.” The problem I have with most “five-point Calvinists” is that the Canons of Dort contain much more than five points. Many explanations of the TULIP (total depravity, unconditional election, limited atonement, irresistible grace and the perseverance of the saints) are gross simplifications of the Canons of Dort. [This is especially true of explanations given by those who oppose Calvinism. It is easier to knock down a straw man than it is to knock down a real man, and so it is easier to criticize an oversimplified Calvinism that the more robust form.] Some of those who teach the “five points” leave out some of the quotes below: This death of God's Son is the only and entirely complete sacrifice and satisfaction for sins; it is of infinite value and worth, more than
Read more

Intelligent Design

-
The Intelligent Design (ID) movement makes much of the argument from irreducible complexity. Dr. Michael Behe has become famous for a simple example, the mousetrap. He points out that the mousetrap will not perform its function without all of its parts. The wooden base, the metal hammer, a spring, a catch and a metal bar to hold back the hammer are all necessary parts. One component by itself will not catch a mouse. Mainstream evolutionary science has a counter-argument. To paraphrase Dr. Kenneth Miller, if you disassemble the mousetrap, each component can serve as something useful on its own. If we take away the catch and metal bar, we have something left that can serve as a paper clip. The spring could make a simple two-section key chain. The wooden base makes a paperweight. Evolutionary processes like random mutation and natural selection can combine and retain the useful parts as the complicated evolves to perform the complex function. The useful parts are combined into the mousetr
Read more