Wednesday, October 26, 2011

The Pro-Choice Christian ... What?

As hard as this may be to believe, there are many Christians who are pro-choice.  Some of them (at least per their claims to be Christian) are presidents of this country.  I have had at least on close friend who was a solid believer, ran outreaches at a local flee market every weekend, studied his Bible every day, and yet was still pro-choice (though he did ultimately repent of that wrong belief).  The arguments usually given are that while they are personally opposed to it, they do not have the right to impose their morality on another person or that you can not legislate morality.  If a Christian ever says that to you, pick up a rock, and throw it at their head (ok well maybe not).  I can guarantee they will be upset.  They may even want to attack you.  As their anger arises and they inevitably ask them why you did that with an angry tone, you then need to ask them why he is angry because while he may believe that throwing a rock at someone's head is wrong, he has no right to impose that morality upon you.  You see, it is not now nor was it ever about legislating morality or imposing a moral code onto another, it is about protecting victims.  Then again, when you think of it, the very idea that anything is a crime is legislating some kind of morality.  Otherwise, why is murder a crime?  You would say because it is wrong to take the life of another.  That is a moral judgement, and it is the result of that moral judgement that murder is wrong.  In the case of abortion, beyond the moral issue, it is about protection of the most helpless of victims.  As for the Christian, there is one law there is one law that you need to keep in mind, and it is a law that has been enforced ever since Cain and Abel.
You shall not murder.  Exodus 20:13 NKJV
It really is that simple.  This principle is embodied in just about every criminal code ever brought forth by man.  The problem with abortion is not that these Christians or that society in general believes that murder is wrong, it is really a matter of defining what life is.  Many, even in the church, do not really recognize a developing fetus as a real live human being.  We do not see them or they may not have any human-looking form yet so we write them off as something less than human and by that less than alive.  You see, your position on abortion is ultimately decided as to what you perceive that unborn life to be.  I do not know of any sensible person or even the most rabid of pro-choice activists who are pro-infanticide.  Unless someone is truly sick in the head, no one believes that killing babies is right and there are harsh laws to protect born infants against such crimes.  What this creates is a disconnect that is a real stretch in logic.  If you bash a baby's head against a wall, killing it, you are a monster.  A few months earlier, before he or she was born, and you either tear it limb from limb, suffocate it and suck out its brains, chemically burn it alive, or vacuum it out of the womb, you are a doctor. 

To those who do not consider an unborn child to be alive, I need to ask just what do you consider it to be?  You can not just call it a "clump of cells."  It is a unique individual, with genetic characteristics that will never again be seen by man.  The same DNA that convicts or exonerates a suspect in a crime is the same DNA that person had from the very first cell division.  That is how unique that "clump of cells" is.  Do you think it is a formless mass?  Again, that would be terribly wrong.  Anyone who has ever studied prenatal development knows that from the very first cell divisions, a plan is in process and a structure is in place.  It is not formless at all, but a highly organized developing human being.  Humans do not just "happen" but follow a set process developed by God and encoded in our DNA that guides our development from fertilized egg to infant and beyond.  Just as an infant is just as human as the man or women he or shy will become, so is the fetus just as human as the infant he or she will become.  In fact, whether or not that child is he or she is determined right at fertilization, so is that person's eye color, hair color, height, and every other characteristic that is determined by genetics.  If you look at your child and notice the curly blonde hair and sweet blue eyes that your daughter has or the hazel eyes, straight brown hair, and above average height your son has, those characteristics were determined back when that child was merely a fertilized egg.  If you kill that egg or any stage in between, that child standing before you now will never have come to be.  You would have killed him or her and that child will have been gone forever.  You can not replace what that child was going to become just by having a new child.  You killed that child and you and the world have been deprived of all he or she was ever going to be.  Abortion kills, there is no getting around that fact.

Finally, we have the central core of the pro-choice argument and it is the argument that gives them their name.  The argument is that a woman is free to do what she wants with her own body and that no law has the right to tell her to keep an unwanted child inside of it.  Their argument turns a living and developing human being into a parasite that is only their by choice.  The are turning the miracle of life into an undesired "side effect" of sex.  I wonder if they even understand the ramifications of their wicked logic.  Of course this same argument denies a father of any rights whatsoever regarding whether or not his son or daughter is killed.  In the end, women are allowed by law to play God in determining whether or not their child has a right to exist.  For Christians who believe in women having the choice, please understand what you are saying.  You are saying that women have the right to be a god.  You are also saying that sex is not God's means for procreation and you are denying the fact that children are not a side effect but a gift from God.  Finally, you are denying that children, even in the womb, are created by God in His image.  You are giving man the right to overrule God on the people He chooses to create.  The fact is that sex is the means by which we procreate, and it is God who creates that new life inside mothers through a process He created for that very purpose.  That is the reason that sex even exists.  Surely it is pleasurable and in that it is given as a gift to husband and wife, but please understand that its pleasures are the side effect but its purpose is to procreate.  It is the close intimate act that it is not because it happens to give husbands and wives great pleasure, but because it is the means why which God creates a new life through them. 

So the pro-choice argument is null and void.  The choice is really in whether or not to have sexual intercourse or whether or not to get married.  The choice is whether or not to submit to God in allowing Him to determine what life He chooese to create or taking it upon yourselves to think that you know better.  The fact is that if you do not choose to procreate, there will be no procreation.  If you choose to procreate, then you must be ready for what can come from such a union.  Please do not bring up the rape and incest argument.  First of all, it is a red herring argument.  If a pro-choice person asks about incest and rape, ask if they will agree to a law that outlaws all abortion except in those cases.  Their answer will betray their dishonesty in even bringing it up.  They do not care about those who have gone through such a trauma but only about exploiting their trauma to try and further their argument.  The fact is, though, that if that horrible act does result in pregnancy, we still must recognize that God had a reason for creating that life and a great blessing can come through a horrible act.  What someone intended for evil, God can turn for good.  Instead of counseling such women to hate their attacker (and I am not saying that their attacker should not be punished for his actions to to furthest extent of the law), they should be counseled to love that new life that will come from it.  Even if that child is not a blessing to her, that child can be an answer to prayers to someone who has been waiting a very long time to adopt. 

I almost forgot on argument and this is one used commonly by the pro-choice movement to get laws blocked.  They argue that any law limiting an abortion does not have a provision to allow for it if the mother's life depends on it.  First of all, this is a very rare occurance and only accounts for 2.8% of all abortions.  Furthermore, that 2.8% accounts for any and all cases where maternal "health" is at "risk."  This means that cases where it is definately life or death for the mother are extremely rare as this accounts for cases where it might be considered to possibly have any kind of ill health effect on the mother.  So what to do in those rare cases where there is a real chance that keeping the baby will kill the mother.  Quite honestly, I pray I am never in such a tough situation.  The fact is though, we must consider that keeping the baby may kill the mother but having an abortion will definately kill the baby.  The fact is that everything must be done to save both.  To kill a child to save a parent should be unthinkable.  I mean what father would not jump in front of a bullet to save his child and what mother would not pray a deadly disease upon herself if it meant saving her child.  I know this is a very grave situation,  but it is one that we must consider when we engage in sexual intercourse.  It all comes back to that choice that would prevent an unwanted child threatening the life of his or her unwilling mother.  If the mother wanted the baby, I can not imagine her making the choice to kill it, even if it meant great risk to her. 

In the end, the real failure is in our failure to recognize that unborn children are still children.  Just because you have not met the child does not give you the right to kill him or her.  Just because that child is developing inside the body of a woman, does not give the woman the right to kill it.  That is something that should have been considered before engaging in sex.  We must recognize that those children are children no matter where they are in their development.  We must recognize that just as a baby is a much of a person as an adolescent, a fetus is just as much of a person as a baby.  We can not allow anyone to play God and decide whether or not a person created by God in His image has a right to exist or not.  To think that we allow the worst kind of brutality to be performed on the most helpless and innocent among us should make us all sick to our stomachs.  The people who cry out in favor of abortions are the same kind of poeple who cried out to crucify our Lord.  You are advocating for the brutal death of someone completely innocent.  The Bible tells us to love our neighbor as we would like to be loved, we must remember that unborn babies are not just formless clumps of cells, but our neighbors, human beings created by God in the image of God and being knit together in the womb for His purposes.  If you love God and your neighbor, then there is no way you can be pro-choice because to be so is to undermine God and consent to the brutal slaughter of your neighbor.  And in that act, you not only deny your own faith, but you deny the entire Word of God itself. 
Jesus said to him, "'You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.' This is [the] first and great commandment. And [the] second [is] like it: 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets."  Matthew 22:37-40 NKJV

No comments:

Post a Comment