The
Real Yin-Yang? June 8, 2009
The polar opposites shown above are
doubtless the most divisive points of view that face us today. Asking
someone their opinion on abortion is often comparable to throwing gasoline
on a fire. Everyone has an opinion one way or the other; and generally
those opinions are stated in language best described as inflammatory.
Before going further let me tell you
where I come down on the issue, just so you may not accuse me of cowardice
by not expressing my thoughts. Do not jump to any conclusions regarding
any of my views, but rather hear me out to the end.
I am an Evangelical Christian and as
such I cherish all human life. It further means that I believe that
abortion is wrong based on any number of Biblical references. If
the terminating of pregnancies by surgery or any other method were to end
five minutes from now I would be one happy camper.
I would be concerned however by what
means the process ended. If pregnant women everywhere would voluntarily
see their pregnancies to full term then well and good. If however
the courts, the Congress or a group of vigilantes were to recriminalize
abortion then I would be very upset because I believe that abortion is
not a legislative issue but a very personal matter.
Understand that I believe strongly in
the right of all Americans to freedom of religious expression, and there
is no endorsed state religion. The founding fathers were quite clear
in their protections of individual rights and civil liberties. Unfortunately
the Union lost its way on a few issues and the Supreme Court and /or Congress
continues to make sure that each of us enjoys the same freedoms.
President Obama has been called an abortionist
and if he is guilty then surely so am I. I share his views that we
cannot and should not enact legislation that denies a woman’s right to
choose no matter how strongly we believe that it is wrong. If we
did it is forcing her to believe the same way we do thus violating her
First Amendment rights.
In a speech at Notre Dame on Sunday,
May 17th, 2009, the President advocated pregnancy to term, promote adoption,
and provide better pre-natal care. This speech once again framed
his position which was more notably expressed during an interview by Rick
Warren of Saddleback during the Presidential Campaign. In both instances
he stated unequivocally that he fully endorses women’s pregnancy to term,
the promotion of adoption, and providing better pre-natal care. Again
we agree because some girls did not have access to the services needed
for mother and baby to be healthy and on that basis may have made the wrong
choice.
Anyone that opposes or supports abortion
should take the time to read the Supreme Court case of Roe v Wade to understand
the background of this controversy. (Case No. 70-18 Argued: December
13, 1971 --- Decided: January 22, 1973) The case was brought simply
to decriminalize the law in Texas as well as most if not all other states.
Although not stated in the Supreme Court
Review existing laws did not present a significant deterrent to abortions
because if your wealth was sufficient and money was not the object, then
the procedure was available.
Often at the root of this controversy
the two sides argue with regard to when life actually begins. Many
of course consider that it is exactly at conception and others believe
it is some time later. One of my contentions has always been is the
unwillingness of the medical community to define that moment when life
actually begins. However they have used the standard of PVS
(persistent vegetative state) to determine when life has ended, or when
brain functions ceased to exist with no hope of return. So why would
it be so wrong to apply this same criteria regarding the beginning of life?
I took the time to re-read the case
prior to this writing and realized that I had forgotten what I believe
reinforces this point. Justice Blackmun in expressing the majority
opinion refers to the “quickening” of the fetus. This is when the
first signs of fetal activity begin. (I found it interesting that
the time period as expressed by early theology was that this was at 40
days post conception for males and 80 days for females). [Note ¹]
Roe v Wade was decided on the Due Process
Clause and the natural right to privacy as provided in the Fourteenth Amendment.
This drives the anti abortion folks crazy because the foundation of their
argument invokes the sacredness of life from deeply held religious convictions
notwithstanding the Constitution.
My views as well as that of President
Obama are rooted in deeply held religious views as well. However,
I think we might agree that it may also be a matter of the First Amendment
which insures that my views should never be forced upon another.
I may have every right to believe in God, whereas another person has every
right to not believe. Regardless, legislation or argumentation will
never resolve this issue.
If I have any interest in changing your
mind or have a concern for your eternal soul then I should get busy and
make sure that I do everything I can to help you understand that God is
real and Jesus Christ His Only Son died on a cross so that we all could
enjoy an eternal life. We Christians need to be smart enough to realize
that we will have a better opportunity to show someone the way to the cross
if we get them to follow us instead of them being pushed, shoved or even
pummeled into concurring with our point of view.
[Note ¹]
Obviously this disparity in the numbers
was determined by some Neanderthal!
