Abortion: A very sad debate

Posted on January 22, 2009. Filed under: Politics, Theology |

I started this blog a while back as a way to share my lighthearted thoughts on many different issues. With the inauguration of our new president, Barrack Obama, there has been an uprising of many liberal points of view, many of which have come to be considered mainstream pop psychology. This saddens me, because many people, especially in my generation adopt viewpoints without giving a second thought to what their point of view means. 

Before I continue writing, I would like to say that I am basically pro-life. To be more exact, I am 97% pro-life, and 3% pro-choice. Let me explain. 97% of the time, abortion is the result of an inconvenience. 3% of the time, it is something that is medically necessary to save the life of the mother, and this is where I believe that the choice of whether to terminate the pregnancy comes down to the mother or whomever is next in line. (Come on, if you disagree with that, I would question your motives in general.)

Today as I write, I would like to challenge the anti-abortionists. First of all, let me say that I agree with your cause, and I am on board with that. I am against, however, your less than appropriate graphics that you use to get your message across. I viewed an anti-abortion website today that had very graphic pictures of what a baby looks like after the abortion process. I was very disturbed. I was mortified. Even more, I was blown away that you would stoop to a level to manipulate someone into your decision using such tasteless graphics. This is terribly offensive, and I would encourage you to re-evaluate not only your methods, but our motives. 

The questions that conservatives and some moderates should be asking themselves is not how do we beat the liberals, but how can we educate people on the subject of morals and ethics while at the same time showing grace and love. Many women in this nation are tormented by their decision to terminate a pregnancy. What do you think showing them these graphic pictures does to them? Imagine the pain they go through!!! Are we dumb enough to think that these women experience no emotional toll? Are we that ignorant that we think when they leave the clinic they say to themselves “Oh well, that was fun… Well, off to get my nails done?” I hate that abortion was even invented and legalized, and  I’m not by any means defending them, their decisions, or the act of abortion, I am simply asking if we can be humble enough as Christians and conservatives to evaluate our motives and our methods. Could there be a better way? Are we doing this out of overflow from the love God has given us, with a caring attitude towards the broken hearted, or are we attacking violently because we got a fire in our rear-end from some James Dobson broadcast, where he was no doubt leading the charge of some lackluster, thoughtless plan of action that would continue to tarnish the name of Jesus and his church?

I would like you to watch the following video. Recently posted by a not only a pro-choice, but a pro-abortionists blogger, This video simply broke my heart. Listen to the question. What would YOU say? Why? Could you take part in these protests and show love? What are we doing to minister to the girls who are today faced with the choice of “Do I have the baby, or have an abortion?

Advertisements

Make a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

12 Responses to “Abortion: A very sad debate”

RSS Feed for Joshfowler.net – Thinking it over Comments RSS Feed

I’ve written on this topic. I would be curious for your thoughts.

Abortion is one of the most important issues facing our nation… I think it is healthy for us to keep the debate moving forward.

Hey man, I think you’re pretty much right on the issue, but….(I always seem to have a “but”).

I have no problem showing people the “tasteless” pictures…abortion is tasteless! When Waynesville was voting on alcohol by the drink the ones against it placed a totaled car on church property (I think) to show the effects alcohol can have. The city made them remove it, because it was “tasteless.” People don’t like to see the effects of their actions! What makes these pictures tasteless? It’s reality whether it’s pretty or not! I don’t think it’s manipulation, just truth! Motives can always be questioned and by the answers on the video, some of them need to be questioned.

as far as you’re 97/3 theory…if we create a line of acceptable murders, then whose to say the line can’t be pushed back? What about 96% 4%? I have a hard time justifying the killing of any life that God has created, no matter the circumstances. I understand wanting to save the life of the mother and I have no idea what I would do in that situation and I pray that I’m never forced to make that decision, but I just don’t think I have the right to make decisions for God. If He created it, then it’s His, not mine!

Good thoughts!

First of all… i like your “butts.” Oh, wait a second, did that sound gay? Just kidding. I really do like the thoughts you bring to the table man, seriously. And, I am also looking forward to breakfast in the morning.

Let me, if I may, give my reaction to your thoughts. As far as the pictures are concerned, You reminded me of a great point. People do need to know the effects of their actions. However, with that line of thinking, and the shock value that comes with those pictures of aborted premature fetuses, let’s apply that level of shock awareness and tasteless action to all of our causes. For example, taking a picture of a dead obese mans body underscored by a caption that says “don’t overeat, or this is what will happen,” accompanied by some scripture on gluttony. More eye opening, in keeping with national porn Sunday, the Sunday that brings awareness to the fact that an estimated 40% of the church is addicted to pornography, how about we place a big tall inflatable erect penis out on the church lawn next to some astroglide? Think about the logic in that! How offensive would that be? Think… the purpose of porn is to display pictures primarily for the purpose of sexual arousal. It is an effect of people’s actions. Sure it may raise awareness, and maybe get a few people in the door, but is it the best way?

Let me share a story with you. For the purpose of this blog and a certain individual’s anonymity, I have manipulated the details of this story- Some years back I met a girl named Jenny. I was (and still am) learning a lot in ministry, and was trying to think of some ways that we could raise awareness of sanctity of life Sunday. My idea was that we had a large transparent window in the church where many people would go by and see various posters and advertisements for events coming up in the church. I wanted to put colorful baby feet all over the windows, (You know that thing where you make a fist with your hand and dip it in paint and then put it on the surface of whatever you are trying to paint on,) and underscore it with a caption that said something like “These babies live’s could have been saved. Call Asheville pregnancy support today if you are facing an unwanted pregnancy. There are people waiting to talk to you…” or something like that. When I shared this story with Jenny, she gave me a blank stare. It was a stare of hurt, mixed with confusion, mixed with… I don’t know what. She then proceeded to tell me that she had an abortion at age 16. Her reason- She was afraid of the violent reaction her parents may have. I’m not excusing this, just keep reading. She then proceeded to tell me how a day never goes by that she doesn’t think of her unborn child. Many sleepless nights she has spent dreaming about the day when she goes to heaven, and will be able to meet her little child. She admits to being guilty of murder, but can tell you with confidence that she has repented, and God has forgiven her. The pictures that I described earlier makes her nauseated. They send her into depression. Is this how we want to be as christians? How does this model the “forgive and forget” method of forgiveness that we read about in our bible. I’m just saying. It’s important to think about these things.

As far as the 97/3 thing. I don’t know… Biblically, your devotion is to your wife first, your children second. Seems like a no-brainer to me. I wouldn’t call terminating the life of an unborn to save my wife murder. Most of the time in those cases, the baby and the mother are on the brink of death. I can’t speak for everyone, but for me, I would always choose my wife. I also don’t feel that in that case it’s making a decision for God. I hope that through his holy spirit, he has given me some liberty to make the tough calls.

Dude, I am serious when I say I love the discussion you bring to the table. I hope we are able to do this more. I would love to know your thoughts on my thoughts.

Josh

I really didn’t see a reason to watch the video to its entirety though I did. Why are these people demonstrating against an action without truly thinking about all aspects? It seems rather silly. First of all, is what you stated (that 97% of abortions are done out of convenience/3% are done because of high risk pregnancies or health reasons) is this a correct statistic or is it simply your opinion? If it is a true statistic, I would like to see your sources. I only question because of certainty, no other reason. Child birth is still an extremely dangerous act, although we have great technological advances, the danger is still inherent. And this question goes to Jonathan, you wrote, “I have a hard time justifying the killing of any life that God has created, no matter the circumstances.” If this assertion is correct, and by all means pull me up if I am wrong; but the thing that separates something that is living or has ever lived from something that hasn’t, is DNA. By association I am guessing that you believe that God created everything? You honestly cant justify the death of any life that God has created? what about the fuel your body needs for survival? what about insects or things within the animal kingdom? what about plants? You see, there are justifications for killing, and you my friend, are just as guilty as everyone else. I will take it that you don’t have the understanding that DNA is an indicator of life, and I will assume, the you think h.sapiens more worthy or special of life by such admissions. Getting back to point, abortion is a topic which no one really enjoys, but to put it in another context, abortion is a natural mechanism that women (and men) have. Take that as it is written, unless you want me to go into detail, but I think that would be a bit graphic but nevertheless, equal, when addressing life at its most basic form. We need to realize what we are doing here. What the argument is exactly over. It is not the ending of life, as I have just proved; or we wouldn’t survive. It is about the level importance we put on human beings. I see nothing wrong with that; but we need to at least be aware or conscious of our own arguments.

Josh, Cara,
Wow! what a great discussion going here…let me answer some questions.

First, Josh, your examples of the illustrations…the porn Sunday…instead of an erect penis, how about showing a child who’s dad ran off with his secretary and who’s mom has fallen into depression, because her house is being foreclosed upon since she can’t make the payment alone! and so on…and so on…isn’t that the effects of porn? Or the former worship leader who had to move across the country so nobody will recognize him in public as the porn freak pervert and get a secular job because a church won’t hire him….becuase of his porn addiction! Really? an erect penis?

About Jenny…maybe if somebody had done exactly what you were talking about doing with the baby feet and message below it, she would have made a different decision. I don’t think I need to hide the truth from thousands of pregnant girls to protect the “feelings” of one. She made a mistake, and she will have to live with it. I can’t help if the truth offends her.

Which leads me into my next point, “forgive, and forget?” Where do you get that? I’m all about forgiving people, but my brain isn’t capable of forgetting. She may even come to a point of forgiving herself, but she will never forget! If I lend you my car for the weekend, and you total it because you were doing 90 in a 45…I may forgive you, but I will never forget that and I will never lend you my car again! If I did, then I would be stupid!

If you babysit my child and sexually molest him, I may forgive you, but if I forget then I’m a bad parent!

I have been forgiven of my sin, but I hope I never forget where I came from, what God reached down and pulled me out of! If I do forget my sin, then why should I rejoice in my salvation?

Cara,
really? I appologize for not being more specific. I was referring to the killing of HUMAN life. “I have a hard time justifying the killing of any anthropological life that God has created, no matter the circumstances”

I have more, but I don’t expect you to agree or even understand, because I have read your belief system post.

In my opinion, based upon the Word of God, Yahweh, Jehova, I believe that your scientific claim that all life has DNA is wrong. I believe that spiritual life doesn’t have DNA.

Also, I believe that Human life is much different than any other life form. God created humans in His image! He didn’t do that with the plants. He gave man dominion over the animal kingdom, therefore, we can kill animals and eat them.

I hope I have clarified my views.
I don’t think the issue is the level of importance we place on human beings either. The real issue is truth. You and I unfortunately will probably never agree on any subject. I believe that truth is absolute and doesn’t change based on my experiences. Correct me if I’m wrong, but you believe that truth is relative and totally depends on your experiences or education. We can go back and forth a number of issues, but until we agree on what is true, we will only agree on other issues if your experience is similar to mine on a particular subject. You see, I believe that Jehovah God is Truth, and what His Word says is absolute truth, therefore, I’m not placing any higher worth or importance on human life, He is. That’s an absolute for me, because He said, not because I said it!

I still enjoy the conversations and hope you, both Josh and Cara, do too!

Jonathan, I am tolerant to any view, however, not all life consists of DNA? Any 6th grade biology student could shoot that assertion down in flames. As for “spiritual life” I take that is used as a means of artistic expression; biologist have yet to find any “special” differences pertaining to life other than biological differences, the rest is purely skeptical. As far absolute truth is concerned, how is it possible? The scripture is open to interpretation, which means it is based on subjective understanding. The color blue is the color blue, until we experience it; we understand that it is the color blue from wavelengths that hit the cones of our eye at 475nm, mind you, if your were to have a deformity, perhaps a few more or less cones, the experience or perception of the color would be different. I would like to know which scripture of the old testament is used today and how you determine that usage. I understand that when Jesus died, a few things were supposed to have changed but how are we to surmise which is still to be followed and which is to be forgotten. I find this to be a huge discrepancy as far as the teachings go, throughout the old testament you see inequality of the sexes, genocide, and bigotry (gods chosen people) etc. so if by asserting all of these things as absolute truth, are we not degrading the progression and intelligence we have come to know throughout the last few thousand years? Basically, all literature and scripture is bound by interpretation and subjectivist thought, after all, not all people that follow the same religion as you, have the exact assumptions of absolute truth: therefore how can you insist that your ideology is absolutely true? The logic is simply flawed.

Cara, are you making the claim that there are no absolute truths?

Scripture is not open for interpretation and is not subjective.

There are no discrepancies and no contradictions. It is infalliable and inerrant. God doesn’t make mistakes.

Wait wait wait!! I hate to be the whistle-blower in this, but there are some important issues to address. First of all, I want everyone who reads this to leave a comment, and give their two cents worth. Secondly, I have some of my own thoughts.

1.) Cara, on your question about the statistics, you can read the exact ones at http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/psrh/full/3711005.pdf
That is where I got the 3 % number.

2.) Jonathan- Come on dude, if your gonna make statements like “Scripture is not open for interpretation and is not subjective,” then you need to at least elaborate on that. I have no idea what you mean, but that statement in and of itself isn’t true, and I don’t even believe you believe that statement. If the Bible is not open to interpretation, and isn’t subjective, then why did you go to the John 3:16 conference, and why have all your study materials? What about hermanudics? Fine if you want to make that statement, but elaborate.

Cara, I understand, in theory, what you mean in your arguments of science and biology, but you must take into consideration that no matter what you believe, it is FAITH. Faith isn’t provable. We’ll never have scientific proof of a spiritual realm. I don’t believe that the supernatural and science can be mixed, or at least not very easily. One can argue ideology and religion, but it’s pretty hard to argue experiences and life transformation.

Jonathan, yes I am asserting that there are no absolute truths when it comes to experience; experience is subjective; therefore no certain experiences are exactly the same. That’s why I am expressing that when something comes down to interpreting language or literature, there will be varying degrees of understanding because it relies upon our experience of the terms and the connotation.
Josh, thanks for the link, and I have read it thoroughly. I s’pose inconvenience in its basic denotation- “something that causes discomfort, trouble, etc.” is a pretty fitting term to use. I also understand how we bastardize terms in such a way to make the situations sound as if they are trivialities, such as “having a child inconvenienced the girl because she could no longer party and have a social life” I was just confused as to what degree of trouble or discomfort you were addressing. Thanks for the clarification. I understand that faith isn’t something that can be measured, you cant measure trust in any fashion, and whatever one chooses to be their foreground of trust, isn’t to be mocked or looked down upon as if less important. I would never be so bold to exclude all realms of thought, whether it be scientific or “spiritual” however, the forefront of my beliefs differ, slightly, from that of yours and Jonathan’s but that is never meant to convey arrogance; only to question with logic and rationale. I enjoy speaking of these things because if not for any other reason but sharing understanding, we are learning, teaching, and growing. I was a little concerned that when I had addressed my beliefs as lacking all supernatural, that you wouldn’t continue further discourse. Thanks for being so open minded and proving me wrong 🙂 and as I addressed earlier about what to take and what to exclude from the Old Testament, I would like some clarification of this matter if at all possible.

Josh,
I prayed outside of an abortion facility this past Saturday morning. During the course of an hour, about seven cars showed up to bring the women in to kill their children. It reminded me of cars lining up for a funeral procession except all seven were hearses–or so they seemed to me. I do not think we accomplish anything, though, by beating women over the head who have chosen this grisly path. Where would any of us be without the hope of forgiveness? To be blunt–hell! It is been my privilege to share with several women who have had abortions the grace that God brings. Confronting and confessing sin is never easy, but it is the pathway to peace. I showed a video in worship a couple of Sundays ago that is as powerful a pro-life message as you can ever see. You can view it by going to our website and clicking on the video of my sermon “Made in God’s Image/Reflecting His Glory.” How anyone can look inside the womb at the marvel of human life and execute their child is beyond me–and that isn’t just a potshot toward the woman. What about parents who push them that way or men who refuse to take reponsibility or a culture that promotes violence or a church that may speak words of condemnation without acts of compassion? Thanks for the opportunity to share. This is a very big deal.

Just to further expound upon you post Josh, I am not or will ever try to argue experience because I am quite aware that it is impossible for one to be truly correct in any regard to subjectivity. My reason of this discussion is only to open others to a different approach to the topic at hand, and help people realize the actual reason for the abortion debate. It IS because of the level of importance we place on the human species and if it were not, there would be no debate you see? The other point I’d like to bring up is that this argument of Absolute truth. It is incumbent upon us as intelligent individuals to understand that there are differences between our ways of thinking and believing. To claim ones ideologies as Absolute, we are in a sense, disregarding all other ways of thinking. Nothing is absolute. We gain our truths through observation, cause and effect. 2 parts hydrogen mixed with one part oxygen makes water; we know that to be true; but this isn’t exempt from change, and if it ever does, we will adapt accordingly. We know this is true based upon the number of outcomes that arise from the experiment. I see something very dangerous in claiming a belief as absolute truth; I feel that it can, if taken to fanatical levels, can be extremely destructive and harmful to humanity as a whole. Do you not feel that the martyr would be a prime example of the extreme actions one takes because of a belief in absolute truth? Whether it be religious, political, or whatever, we need to be open to change and to error, we need to have our ideologies and beliefs challenged; for that will only make them stronger and instill the capacity for growth. If we only believe one thing and that one thing is the only viable way to achieve goodness, then we are sorry lot. I applaud the fact that you accept interpretation to be applicable to belief; that shows that you are really thinking!

Cara, Dennis, Jonathan, and everyone else. I have started a new post on this debate. Enjoy!


Where's The Comment Form?

Liked it here?
Why not try sites on the blogroll...

%d bloggers like this: