I was not surprised to get a dissenting comment on my last post....but I maintain my position:
Hi Leah, I'm sorry that you consider yourself a former reader. I don't claim to know everything or be right all the time or say that one party is more Christian than the other (both parties honor various Christian concepts in my opinion), but what my post was about and what I do know is that Obama supports giving women the right to murder their babies, even supporting partial birth abortion. In my heart, I cannot understand why people who call themselves Christians give Obama a pass on this stance of his because he also wants to help the poor. Did Jesus want to help the poor or want to see everyone with God-given dignity? Of course, and I agree with you that we should all endeavor to help those less fortunate than ourselves.
But would Jesus think it was fine for someone to kill someone else? Not a chance, not ever. And I think it's a tragedy for our nation to place any modern social concern above the safety of its people. When babies are allowed to be killed, they are no longer safe. None of us are safe when all of a sudden it is okay for one citizen to kill another for whatever reason.
That is why it's a tragedy.
8 comments:
Amen!
Actually, the Bible is very clear in what Jesus wants from us.
Being kind to our brothers and sisters includes not killing those who are unable to defend themselves.
I continue to be confused by the fact that Obama's supporters would try to win over Christians with the theory that because he supports charity (in some aspects) to some groups of people who need it, that somehow counterbalances allowing other (entirely defenseless) groups to be killed. Even if you could somehow do the math and decide that he would feed ten times more poor people than his opponent (in whatever campaign), and that feeding one hundred poor people was equal to killing one baby in value (and I'm being intentionally ridiculous here; there's no possible way to have an equation of this kind), why would anyone support a politician for whom the argument is "on balance, he's doing at least a little more good than harm"?
This is like, "I volunteer ten hours every week at a soup kitchen, and I hit one homeless person a year with my car. I'm definitely a better Christian than someone who does neither."
The real reason I find this argument bewildering is because the fact that the campaign was making it suggests that they thought that anyone would NOT be offended by it (let alone be persuaded). And then I was totally thrown when people WERE persuaded. "Well, sure, Obama wants to keep abortion COMPLETELY legal - maybe even more than it is now - but he supports programs that would get women out of poverty, so probably people would choose fewer abortions." By this logic, we could remove the laws against molesting children, but offer free and comprehensive counseling to pedophiles, and that would be better than keeping child rape illegal.
The scariest part isn't even the fate of the unborn - it's what's happened to the mind of the average citizen. If you already think abortion is fine, this obviously has nothing to do with you, but if you are pro-life and you buy this (and I know people who do), you are braindead. NO reasoning ability is being demonstrated here.
Just my very long-winded contribution...
I completely agree with you and I am so glad that there are people who still hold true to what God has told us through the Bible. It is not that Christians think "they are right" it is that God's word IS right and there is no room for argument in that fact. And if killing someone who is completely innocent isn't a tradgedy then i do not know what is. But just remember that God is still in control and we have to keep praying for our leaders.
I can't believe the girl's response on your last post! Our blogs are just that, OUR blogs. Which means we can express how WE feel without others getting crazy. I completely agree with you and feel very sad for the way the election turned out. Good job standing your ground and protecting those who don't have a voice!
I wonder, without trying to be argumentative, if you feel making abortion illegal will end the issue? With all the talk of killing babies, I've never heard anyone mention how they'd propose to handle the resulting public health and safety issues, of which there will be plenty -- back alley abortionists, women and babies harmed during illegal abortions, issues of rape and incest, health risks. Where will the resources come from? At the risk of angering you, and I do understand on this topic no one's mind will ever be changed once decided, it's not our government's role to be making policy issues based on religious views. In fact, our government was explicitly formed to not do that. Our government, however, does have a responsibility to keep its citizens safe, and (yes, I may be securing my seat in hell) the safety of live citizens comes first. Sorry. It's just this is a side of the argument nobody seems to ever talk about. For the record, I am ethically and morally opposed to abortion, but telling everyone they have to agree with what I believe opens up a whole other set of issues. This is an issue that will never have a good resolution.
Thanks for your last post. Whether or not I agree with it or not does not matter. This your space and this country gives the right to speak our opinion. I do think you may want to consider a different view especially since this was once a blog revolving around fertility treatments. The abortion debate is complicated. One view is that it gives us the right as women to choose what we do with our bodies. The same debate could be used regarding fertility treatments. Having conceived two children now via IVF, I'm thankful for the right to choose to do what I want with my body to expand my family. There is also the decision i have to make regarding my two unused embryos. These are decisions that are very personal that i want to make not the government. My concern is that today it is abortion and tomorrow it's fertility treatments. Again, i respect your opinion and your desire to post about it. I am just giving you a different take on it.
Post a Comment