When I speak of the right to life, I am not referring simply to opposition to abortion. Most people who believe in what they would term a right to life are actually anti-abortion rather than pro-life, given the obvious fact that life does not stop at birth. Of course, most people who consider themselves to be pro-choice are actually just pro-abortion, but that's not what I am talking about here. When I say that I am pro-life, I mean that I am opposed to abortion, as well as to capital punishment and killing in times of war. I am also going to take positions that, on the surface, might appear to be contradictory, but which make perfect sense to me and, since I will be referring to my own viewpoint, that's all that really matters. I am not proposing a new religion, and I am certainly not imposing one on anyone else. On abortion, there are really only three questions that are relevant. When do you think life begins? Do you value life? Do you have a right to end a life that is not valuable to you? Biologically, it seems clear to me that life begins with conception, and it certainly exists prior to the actual point of delivery. To me, there can be no logical argument contrary to this. I understand that there are such arguments, but I don't consider them to be logical. Overall, I value life, although there are some lives that I would consider more valuable than others, and there are lives that I wouldn't lose any sleep over at all. When someone rapes and murders a child, or anyone else for that matter, you won't see me standing outside the prison holding a sign protesting his execution. Yet, I wouldn't flick the switch or inject the poison because I don't believe that I have the right to take the life of another human being. I don't believe that anyone else does either, but their conscience isn't my concern. Yes, Old Testament law clearly calls for capital punishment. Yet the stipulation of "life for life" was not enforced with Cain, the world's first murderer. Neither was it enforced with David, whom God called a man after his own heart. Jesus did not advocate the stoning of the woman caught in adultery, although that was clearly the law of the time. It seems to me that the direction in the Bible has been one of an early severity to a later stance of grace, or from retribution to rehabilitation. Genesis 9:6 calls for the death penalty for murderers, but it does so in the nature of an atonement. Christ fulfilled this atonement on the cross. The Old Testament called for the death penalty for eighteen different offenses, yet this law was tempered by the provision of cities of refuge, and for each offense except murder, a redemptive alternative was in place. I do not, however, believe that the Bible clearly calls for an end to capital punishment. Even when Jesus objected to the stoning of the adulteress, He did not necessarily call for an end to the death penalty as it might pertain to other people or situations. The Old Testament clarifies that the death penalty was intended to be a deterrent rather than a call for vengeance, yet I believe that it exists in this country largely because of a demand for revenge. Everyone, even the most despicable murderers have a right to life, although that may not always seem to be the case. Even Jeffrey Dahmer, who killed and ate his victims, became a Christian before he was stabbed to death in prison. For me, however, the social advantage that might result from this deterrent is more than cancelled out by the tragic fact that innocent people are sometimes put to death. The modern use of DNA has proven the innocence of several people who had been sentenced to death or to long prison terms. This, and the fact that the justice system works much differently for the wealthy and the elite than it does for the rest of us is enough to persuade me that capital punishment is wrong. When it comes to war, my opinion might vary somewhat if I could believe that a war was defensive in nature. Unfortunately, most of our wars are not defensive and even those that might seem to be were not without manipulation beforehand. Mostly, wars are about global objectives and political power. Are these wars truly necessary? I don't know, perhaps because the actual reason for them are never divulged. Maybe this is why God rarely puts Christians in charge of governments. I do believe that nations and individuals have the right to self defense.
This is a tough topic and I have to admit that I'm all over the map on it. The one thing that I'm sure of is that ending a life should never be an easy decision.
"On abortion, there are really only three questions that are relevant. When do you think life begins? Do you value life? Do you have a right to end a life that is not valuable to you?" Relevant to you my friend. The subject is deeper than this but does center around these 3 facts: Human women are not brood mares. Human women have the right to make decisions regarding their ownership over their own bodies. Human women, out of love for what is taking place within them, sometimes find it necessary to terminate the growing organism. Above all, a woman need not explain her reasons to you, for you, to make a decision only she should have the power to make. No excuses or apologizes are necessary. Begging your pardon, I did not read the rest of your essay. Couldn't get past your initial thoughts. Will try some other time.
A life is a life when it is viable on it's own. Whether it's an easy decision or not is up to the woman in question. It should not determine her right to abort. It is not our business to judge her right to choose based on her state of mind.
No need to jump on me, I was responding to Ken's entire post and not just to his comments on abortion. I agree with you on a woman's right to choose but I also stand by my comment that it should not be an easy decision to end a life.
I apologize, Beatrice. I am diabetic & my blood glucose dropped just as I was responding. I'm afraid this phenomena is not ideal for being calm! A thousand pardons.
Why on earth would I give an opinion other than my own? Can you tell me where I suggest anything of the sort? I'd be happy to discuss this further if you should ever be in the mood to discuss things that I have actually said. Of course, that would involve actually reading what it was that I have said.
Good post. @Ken Anderson. I agree that many/most of the people who are "pro choice" really are pro abortion, and. many/most who are "pro life" are anti abortion. Five major categories on the question pro life, anti abortion, don't care either way, pro abortion, and pro choice. There are many subcategories and variants, and I have known many more who are pro life (as you are) than I have known pro choice. Many of the Christians are pro life, and that is the position of the Catholic Church ( with the exception of "Just War"). Many of th conservative Christian groups are anti abortion, but not pro life, as they believe that society has the right to make people responsible for their actions and to keep society safe. The middle category is self explanatory. The pro abortion group consists of many who consider it a right of the mother to end the life of their offspring, usually because it is inconvenient but sometimes due to rape , incest or some other criminal act. The age varies from shortly after conception to near term, or even sometimes after a live birth. The last category, and the one that seems to have the fewest adherents, is the pro choice category. A pro choice person usually believes there should be a short time after conception as the responsible time to end a life, and have no objections to information campaigns, waiting periods, etc. as they would for making a house or car purchase. Since they can't change the decision as you can with a simple purchase, these folks have no problem with waiting periods, at least up to 72 hours. My real objections are to people who call themselves pro life but are not, and those who call themselves pro choice, but are pro abortion instead.
That simply is not true. Nobody is pro-abortion. Pro-choice just means that neither the masses nor the government know the individual circumstances the woman ( in many cases, the young girl) is going through. Therefore it should be her choice.
I have one thing that has plagued me since 1968. How many genetic lines have I ended and what would someone have turned out to be had I not killed them?
To me I am not a fan of abortion. I could see a special condition where it might be needed to save the mother but leaving this decision up to a doctor is another problem. The only way in which I can see taking a life is in self-defense. I do have a problem with the death sentence given to a mass murderer but what do you do with them give them free room and board for the rest of their lives. I know some homeless people would love to have that. Death through wars would end very fast when we take the people behind the and put them in jail.