[Bill,
July 9, 2009]
Don't look too long
This story, I don't even know ... it's come close to silencing me. Pray for those at this "party," and for those who justify it.
I felt compelled to point this out, but don't look too long. Remember, spiritual evil corrupts two ways: (1) It makes you despair. (2) It fascinates.
If you read this link, pray for them and then remember God's glory. When I see stories like this, I understand Calvary better. And my own role in sending God there. God have mercy on us all.
* I struck through this sentence because it's not fair to members of the secular left. Many of them are pro-life, and many are just as horrified, even if pro-choice, at this story. My own thinking has become more and more tribal, and I'm tired of it. My biggest regret on this blog has been my own development of a tribal mentality -- liberals here, conservatives there. That's not something I believed most of my life, as I've always tried to see people as individuals.
I know exactly what you mean, by the way. Sort of, there but for the grace of God go I.
Also, the author is really curiously spineless. Ardently pro-choice, but not, from the looks of it, by any principle. I don't know what's in his soul, of course, but he sure sounds like a person who holds his beliefs about abortion entirely by group identification ("peer pressure").
I think Chris' assessment is dead on with respect to group identification. You're pretty far adrift if your only thought is whether it might be poor taste to have an abortion party fundraiser. That doesn't actually lead you to believe he's given any critical thought to the issue.
While I think a variety of people have a similar disregard for those of different gangs/races/religions/beliefs/etc. as this guy and this pregnant girl have for an embryo, at least other human beings are not necessarily defenseless.
This is evidence that the legal acceptance of "choice" of any form in and of itself contributes to a decline in respect for life. Even a person who is essentially interested in secular policies should not argue that pro-choice policies add to an ethical society (ethical in the context of valuing and respecting your fellow citizens).
How do you find these links?
Super G
You know, I'm really amazed by the way that he kind of notices how absurdly hypocritical Maggie's friends are being (they believe that abortion isn't bad, they believe that promiscuous sex is great, but they're still angry at the boyfriend), and instead of thinking that there's something wrong with them, starts to try to figure out how to reconcile this with the rest of what he "believes".
It's weird to see someone so openly the mind-slave of others, and not even impressive others, and completely unimpressive others, at that.
Where the mother is threatened, I think that the standard doctrine of people being able to use deadly force to defend themselves from mortal threats is perfectly suitable. It wouldn't create more of a loophole than that doctrine already does.
Then I realized two things: a fetus isn't a person and if men had to carry it, this whole thing wouldn't even be an issue. Seriously, abortion would be like getting your oil changed.
That being said, if I were still under the same ethos that you are, I would say the same things. In fact, I did, many times. Knowing what I know now (i.e., what a fetus actually is, what procedures are actually used 99.9% of the time, etc.), it just doesn't make sense anymore. The truth, as usual, is less incendiary than the rhetoric.
But this only works because I don't believe that each fetus has a soul implanted by God at the moment of conception. If I believed that, nothing else would matter. Of course, the problem with that is 70% of women who have abortions are Christians so I'm not sure it matters to them.
A fetus is of course a person -- it can be nothing else. The question is how many rights does a human have at its first stages of life. I think the right to life is certainly a fair place for a society to start.
Second, the male thing wouldn't change a thing, except if they had babies, they wouldn't be males. The definition thing, again. What you're saying is self-contradictory.
BTW, I don't think the issue is ensoulment -- Nat Hentoff is an atheist and an ardent pro-lifer. Lots of atheists are.
You're right that far too many Christians have abortions -- it's a scandal for the church.
You were right the first time. Again, I'm glad to hear you were once pro-life and attended rallies. I hope you find your way back there.