I am already getting lots of private comments about my post entitled "Abortion."
Maybe what I should have said was, "If we are against abortion, what are we for? Are we for providing homes for these babies? Are we for providing education about sexuality, pregnancy, and parenting? Are we for fiancially supporting agencies designed to help? If we are against something, we must be for something else."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
The consequences of Roe vs. Wade have resulted in 47,282,293 reported abortions since 1973 and 77% of those were performed on girls in their teens or early 20's. You asked what we are FOR, i'm FOR giving these precious, innocent victims a chance at life. Yes, i'm also for educating, particularly the younger generation, as abortion is becoming a means of birth control. It is heartbreaking to think of all of the unwanted babies in the world, but it's even more heartbreaking to think of those that are never given a chance. After having Spencer, I became a strong Pro-Life advocate, but after having a miscarriage the idea of abortion infuriates me even more. I'm FOR doing whatever is necessary to end abortion. I recently read a bumper sticker that said "Jesus would have been aborted". Think about it, if Mary had a choice would she have made the right one? I was reading the comment by anonymous on voting for President Bush because of his stance on abortion. Anonymous is correct, I based my vote on which candidate was Pro-Life and I will continue to vote for every candidate who is Pro-Life because when I ask myself what would Jesus do? I believe Jesus would first and foremost save the children.
Jenny-- I agree. I am very much Pro-life, and I also agree that suffering a miscarriage solidifies that even more. The idea of having an abortion sickens me; it really does. However, it also sickens me to think about a child wandering alone in the streets because he has no one to love him or care for him. I think that we have to find a solution to using abortion as birth control... and I think it all starts within the family unit with education. Thanks for your comments, and I voted for the Pro-Life advocate too, and will again every chance I get. Blessings to you and yours.
In response, let me start by saying that I am VERY much against Abortion. I think that life is precious, and that children are born pure and innocent, deserving every chance there is. As I type this, my three month old daughter is on my lap. That should say enough.
I hate to speak for Conni, but I think that her point may be being missed. I don;t think that necessarily this was an invitation to argue the atrocities of abortion. . .I feel certain that most of us who frequent this blog would be "preaching to the choir". I think that the geater issue is to discuss "what do we do with the babies"?
This IS the question, really. I mean, if we say, very clearly, and all agree that abortion is wrong, then we have the very practical question of what is OUR responsibility to take care of the children?
What are WE, who oppose abortion, doing to provide better sex education and abortion alternatives in schools and underprivaleged communities? What is the Fundamentalist community doing to take care of problems such as undereducation, rampant drug abuse, and mass poverty in our nations inner cities? THESE are the precursors for abortion. . .THESE are the things that are causing abortions, as much as anything else.
Christian Family Services is a wonderful organization, and the work they do with adoption and foster families is beyond super-hero work, and the families that have adopted children should be held in the HIGHEST esteem, however, how many members of the churches of Chroist went out and bought new cars this year, rather than adopting a special needs child? How many picket signs in front of abortion clinics have said "I will adopt your baby?" All through the south, the Bible belt, there are massive congregations of fundamentalist churches, both church of christ and not, that have thick pluch carpet, velvet covered cushioned pews, and shiny gold chendeliers. How much of that money could have been spent to assist a good, loving middle class family to adopt a special needs or minority child, which might otherwise be left in foster care if not aborted. I think that it is hard to tell the poison from the cure sometimes, and while I agree that Abortion is a tragedy, I am not sure that offering blanket legislation without solutions is the right thing to do.
In regards to our current president being "pro-life" I will argue against that. Some one who continues to inflate the pockets of his cronies and friends at the expense of others is hardly "pro-life". The nations that he supports (again, do some resarch into the fiasco of Equatorial Guinea), the companies that he puts priority on, and the damage done to the economy all indicate that the well being of the children of the world are far from high priority for him. How many children in Africa are dying of AIDS, while the current administration turns a blind eye, citing the need for this "War on Terror"? I think taht a person can take an anti-abortion stance, but still hardly be "pro-life". For christian fundamentalists to vote for their leaders soley on the basis of their stance on abortion subsequently dooms MILLIONS of children worldwide to lives and deaths of agony and pain. Jesus loves the poor babies that are being aborted, but he loves the babies dying of Aids too. A consciencious Christian should take ALL of these aspects of a candidates platform into consideration. To do anything less is, in my opinion, shortsighted and lazy.
Finally, I want to make a quick comment about God being "pro-life". I think that fundamentalist Christians need to be careful what attributes they are ascribing to an eternal, unchanging, all knowing God. God Obviously didn't have too much of a problem with the deaths of the innocent little babies in egypt during the exodus. Or the infants in Jericho that were ruthlessly slaughtered when God commanded Joshua to sack the city. How many OTHER kingdoms were slaghtered by the kingdom of israel at God's command, down to the last man, woman, child, infant, granny, and old goat? Surely if the life of innocents was so precious to the God of th ebible, that there would have been some miraculous way for him to care for these war orphans? Some mandate given to his "chosen people"?
There is also the curious passage in Numbers 5:11-31. Is this an archaic version of the "Morning after" pill? I don't know that I can say for sure, but it certainly could be a possibility.
I think that one of the issues that we need to remember is that, to my knowledge, NOWHERE does the Bible forbid Abortion. (please, correct me if i am wrong) I mean, yes, sure, it discusses the wrongness of taking the life of innocents, but then it also is replete with instances where innocent infants were killed by the mandate of God. I am not sure that the case can be made without argument htat the god of the Bible is as "pro-life" as many people would like to think.
What I can say about it all is this: I am "pro-life". My respect for the lives of children both born and unborn is one of the fundamental precepts of my beliefs. I am not convinced that the Bible teaches that same respect, and I am CERTAIN that that respect is not shared by the current administration. I think to christian, "pro-life" should mean a heck of alot more than simply voting republican.
3q
3q- please remember to be respectful on this blog.
God gives life and takes life.
Conni,
I certainly meant no disrespect. I am simply echoing that the traditional fundamentalist stance on being "pro-life" is not as clear cut as one would like to think. I think that weARE all in agreement here, and I am TOTALLY in agreement with you that to simply say we are against abortion and not doing anything about the "rest of the story" is a little inconsistent.
Again, no offense was intended. When religion and politics mix, it is usually a big convoluted mess.
I am against abortion. I am against abortion in cases of rape, though incest I am on the fence about. I am against abortion in the "life of the mother" loophole, because I really think think it is a loophole and not a valid reason for an abortion.
I believe birth control is a choice, but a choice that comes before conception and not afterwards. I am a BIG believer in personal responsibility.
I also believe that voting for a canidate SOLELY because they are anti-abortion is as wrong as abortion is. Just because someone is anti-abortion does not mean they are a good person or a good leader. There are many issues and many ideologies and all must be weighed against each other.
I ALSO believe that to be anti-abortion, but to not realize that SOMETHING needs to be done for these unwanted babies is ALSO as wrong as abortion. To not help in some way is not right. To tell a woman she HAS to have a baby she does not want, but not help her in some way with what she needs to do is also wrong. If she is young, white, and healthy and the baby's father is young, white, and healthy there is not much to worry about, the baby will find a home. But if the baby is not white, the mom used drugs, the baby is not perfectly healthy, etc than most of these babies won't have a home.
Every state in the country needs foster parents for babies AND children. Some healthy who just aren't "priveleged" to be white, some with special needs or chronic illnesses. Please help the situation not just spout ideologies.
PS...this is not directed to anyone in particular, it is just my feelings on the issue.
Post a Comment