Why I'm Pro-Life

[Josiah]

As slavery was the huge moral/political issue for some 200 years in the USA, abortion has become such in our time.

I'm solidly pro-life. It is my top issue in voting and it is a moral position about which I'm passionate. There ARE areas were I "give" a bit (in case of rape, if continuing clearly threatens the physical life of the mother) but I'm pretty solidly pro-life. I "inherited" this, I suspect, from my parents great respect for life that they instilled in me, their great emphasis on protecting the weak, and from my Catholic upbringing. My parents - one a diehard "bleeding heart" liberal, the other a ditto head conservative - both are strongly pro life (although obviously my mom votes contrary to her convictions on this point). As a teen, as a part of my schooling, I volunteered at a Birth Choice center (an amazing experience that had a profound impact on me) and I still contribute generously to some of these organizations.



My primary reasons are two:


1. Human rights. My sister (who has a Ph.D. in biology and does biological research as her vocation) has stressed to me that biologically, it is absurd to argue that the pre-born baby is not a human. She stresses that nothing happens to the DNA as the last bit of the toes exits the birth canal: in terms of species, what is AFTER the exit of the last toe is no different that what was before the crown of the baby's head began appearing outside that canal. While precise definitions of what is and is not "life" and is and is not "human" are not as precise as we'd all like, however we BIOLOGICALLY define such, birth has nothing to do with it. I believe that all humans are endowed with inalienable HUMAN rights simply as a function of they being HUMAN - and chief among these is life (the ONLY right that ultimately matters..... take that away and no other "right" matters at all, applies at all). Now, we can have discussions of self defense, just war, even capitol punishment (and I have related opinions there) but these are all extreme cases usually related to some guilt or physical threat presented by the one permitted to be murdered, and there seems to be consensus that HUMANS are being murdered in these cases. I think we purposely evade this by insisting that the unborn baby is not 100% a "PERSON" ( an argument taken hook, line and sinker from the pro-slavery position where Blacks were 2/3's a person) or when we people talk about the baby as a parasite or fully dependent - all that simply evades the issue that here is a HUMAN - the same species as we. IF we can deprive a whole class, an entire category of living HUMANS - regardless of their guilt or bad behavior or physical threat - deprive them without any due process - deprive them of the most important, most fundamental, most necessary of all HUMAN rights - life - then the most gross injustice has been made and all other innocent humans are threated and weakened.


2. Defending the Weak. The Bible says we are to speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves, we are to defend those who cannot defend themselves, we are to be caretakers of the weak. Men - in particular - have often identified themselves strongly with this defender and providing role..... women - in particular - have seen motherhood as one of providing and defending role. We can see some of this even among animals. I reject the premise that those with political power may THEREFORE, as a FUNCTION of that power, trample on the rights, the humanity, the life of those less powerful or less independent simply as a function of their superior power to do so. One does not have some "right" to choose to murder simply because one has the political power to do it with impunity, to get away with it because other powerful ones will allow it. Remember what the powerful did in the perservation 0f slavery, in their "pro choice" political point that gave NO CHOICE WHATSOEVER to the one impacted: the Black man/woman. We must not fall to the morality that whatever those with sufficient power do to others is "moral" simply because they have the power to do it - and get away with it. Power does not equal moral. Indeed, it is a sad consequence of sin that the weak, the less-powerful are often trampled on by the more-powerful - and thus NEED our protection, our voice, our intervention. I realize this point makes a few women very uncomfortable.... since nearly the beginning of time, THEY were often the victims of this.... THEY were the weak, the helpless, the powerless and thus the victims of horrible things. Fortunately, very very recently, they have gained some power as the powerful (that's us white, middle class, property owning MEN) granted such. But IMO, because of that history, they ABOVE ALL, should be the MOST pro-life, the MOST sensitive to standing up for those with less power against those with more, they should be the LEAST 'pro-choice' (the powerful choose.... the powerless suffer). And indeed, I think women ARE a bit less "pro-choice" than men (although it's pretty close). We need laws, etc. to protect the weak from the strong, to permit civilization (so that it's not the animal "survival of the fittest", the prevailing of the more powerful over the less so).


Now, I realize...... there are enormous human, personal issues here. I realize discovering one is now the mother of a baby can be unplanned, unwelcomed - and a genuine crisis. And while most sex is consensual (and thus all know a baby can result), it's not always. And I realize that motherhood (before and after birth) has ENORMOUS implications - physically, socially, emotionally; indeed in every way possible - and that can be very difficult. Parenthood (mother and father) are perhaps the biggest and most difficult roles humans ever have. I don't gloss over that. I realize, too, that pregnancy and giving birth can be physically dangerous and are enormous physical efforts (and that - technically, that baby is a "parasite" - a LOT of parents will say that parasite continues for at least 20 years! Maybe a lot longer, lol, not to minimize the reality here). I'm not at all unmoved by those realities. And as I mentioned, I'm at least open to discussions when the baby is a real threat to the physical life of the other and perhaps also in cases of rape and incest. But, the simple reality is: sex tends to eventually result in a baby - and all (over the age of 8 at least - know that), all that is part of the responsibility to which we must rise. AND (most importantly), it means that we - as family and as society - need to "be there" for mothers (and fathers) struggling. IMO, we have far, far too much sense of abandoning parents. We need to "be there" as family, friends, community - emotionally, medically and physically (this is what motivated me so strongly in my years working with abortion alternative centers).

While I do not believe governments' role is religious or even primarily moralistic, it IS in part about protecting the weak, the defenseless, the voiceless (especially those who can't vote - meaning looking for human rather than civil or political rights). Just as I strongly rebuke all those years when the government of the USA lacked the guts, the civility to end slavery, so - for identical reasons - I rebuke the USA government today for lacking the guts and civility to end abortion-on-demand. This is the # 1 voting issue for me; I cannot and will not vote for any who is not clearly pro-life when they are in positions to impact that. And while I think it may take 200 years again (but hopefully not bloody war!), someday we will look upon this ugliness in the same way as we now look back upon slavery (or racism or sexism).




What do you think?



- Josiah




.

 

[psalms 91]

I agree, abortion is murder and I stand strongly in the pro choice corner

 

[Lamb]

I a pro-life because we all know what that embryo and fetus will grow into...a baby who will be born. It's not like a surprise of what will come out during birth, we know what it will be. Children are a blessing from God, so why kill them?

 

[MarkFL]

Hello Josiah! :wave:

First, let me say what a pleasure it was to read your post. Even if I disagreed with every point, I would still appreciate how well you outlined and elucidated your points. :thumbsup:

That being said, I actually agree with ALL of your main points, although obviously my morality would be secular in nature, but on these points, regardless how we get there, you and I agree.

I have never subscribed to the notion that an unborn baby is some "thing" not considered to be human until it exits the birth canal. I agree that this is an absurd notion. I would be hard pressed to point to the exact moment in a baby's prenatal development where I could say, Okay at this moment we now have a human being, whereas a moment ago we did not. I would likely say this point is reached before a woman knows she is even pregnant. That's about as specific as I can get with my limited understanding of biology.

It troubles me deeply to think that unborn babies are being discarded by the millions. It is a veritable holocaust. Sure, there is no shortage of human beings here on planet Earth, I would even say there are too many. But this doesn't mean any viable growing human life should be regarded as disposable, no matter how inconvenient that life may be perceived to be, whether to the parents or to society as a whole. It does not speak well for us as a society when abortion is seen as a means of retroactive birth control. I think birth control should actually be conception control, not oops we conceived, but it's okay, we can just get rid of the outcome, and move on as if nothing happened.

There is something rotten at the very core of our society when a pregnancy is treated as a condition that can be terminated for no other reason than a matter of convenience. We need to treat the cause, not the symptom. Sure, our lawmakers can relegate young women back into the makeshift abortion rooms with septic instruments wielded by unskilled hands, but it would be a more pleasant prospect if we could somehow instill in people at a young age more responsible sexual behavior involving contraceptives. I know some would disagree, and that's quite alright, but I think contraceptives are a far more viable approach than abstinence. I'm not saying teaching abstinence should be abandoned at all, but I think we need to teach contraception as well, because we have to face the fact that people, particularly young people, are driven to have sex, and are going to do so no matter what.

I know much of this is already being tried and carried out with limited success. I think we need to try harder...more effort needs to be made to get through to children in school about the consequences of unprotected sex. We need to also realize that parents are dropping the ball at home as well...parents used to take a more active role in teaching their children the value of life, and unfortunately, what the parents fail to do, we as a society have to pick up, in an educational system that is already struggling to teach the basics anymore. But while it is related to this issue, our broken educational system is a whole other topic.

This is an issue with so many facets, and it's going to require a coordinated effort on many different fronts before a real tangible difference is going to be made. Some things are worth fighting for, and I firmly believe this is one of those things.

 

[Josiah]

.... I disagreed with every point.... I agree with ALL of your main points.....regardless how we get there, you and I agree.

??? LOL

I have never subscribed to the notion that an unborn baby is some "thing" not considered to be human until it exits the birth canal. I agree that this is an absurd notion. I would be hard pressed to point to the exact moment in a baby's prenatal development where I could say, Okay at this moment we now have a human being, whereas a moment ago we did not. I would likely say this point is reached before a woman knows she is even pregnant. That's about as specific as I can get with my limited understanding of biology.

It troubles me deeply to think that unborn babies are being discarded by the millions. It is a veritable holocaust. Sure, there is no shortage of human beings here on planet Earth, I would even say there are too many. But this doesn't mean any viable growing human life should be regarded as disposable, no matter how inconvenient that life may be perceived to be, whether to the parents or to society as a whole. It does not speak well for us as a society when abortion is seen as a means of retroactive birth control. I think birth control should actually be conception control, not oops we conceived, but it's okay, we can just get rid of the outcome, and move on as if nothing happened.

There is something rotten at the very core of our society when a pregnancy is treated as a condition that can be terminated for no other reason than a matter of convenience. We need to treat the cause, not the symptom. Sure, our lawmakers can relegate young women back into the makeshift abortion rooms with septic instruments wielded by unskilled hands, but it would be a more pleasant prospect if we could somehow instill in people at a young age more responsible sexual behavior involving contraceptives. I know some would disagree, and that's quite alright, but I think contraceptives are a far more viable approach than abstinence. I'm not saying teaching abstinence should be abandoned at all, but I think we need to teach contraception as well, because we have to face the fact that people, particularly young people, are driven to have sex, and are going to do so no matter what.

I know much of this is already being tried and carried out with limited success. I think we need to try harder...more effort needs to be made to get through to children in school about the consequences of unprotected sex. We need to also realize that parents are dropping the ball at home as well...parents used to take a more active role in teaching their children the value of life, and unfortunately, what the parents fail to do, we as a society have to pick up, in an educational system that is already struggling to teach the basics anymore. But while it is related to this issue, our broken educational system is a whole other topic.

Amen!


Thank you for all of that!



- Josiah




.

 

[MarkFL]

Hey Josiah, what I meant was even if I had disagreed with everything you said, I still would have appreciated the manner in which you posted. However, I did agree with your points.

 

[Krissy Cakes]

Prolife all the way!! :thumbsup:

 

[Tigger]

For me I have a hard time not seeng abortion as a violent act of murder upon an innocent helpless victim. One of the few situations I could agree with it is in an actual life threatening situation of the mother. Funny thing is having this discussion with someone who is prochoice or in most cases a pro abortionist, they fire back with well what about this or that situation? So I cut to the chance to see how they really think and ask them point blank. "Do you agree with abortion on demand?" Translating to the unborn *child's* life being terminated on the whim of being purely inconvenient. Rarely will they come right out and answer the question directly. Even fully understanding the full implications of the question they'd prefer to turn a blind eye to an utter atrocity. And that shows me that their ultimate standard for right and wrong goes no further then what's best for them at the moment.

 

[psalms 91]

I agree it is a selfish act

 

[Ackbach]

I believe it is a human being - a person - from the moment of conception. I believe that's when God endows the soul. You could make an argument from Psalm 139 that the person has always existed in the mind of God. Personhood is where the argument is now. Pro-death people are, for the most part, forced by ultrasound to admit that it is a human being in the womb, as has already been mentioned in this thread. However, they counter by saying that it's not a person until some ridiculously late moment in time, and so killing it is ok. I would agree that there are persons who are not human beings - the three Persons of the Trinity, e.g. However, to argue that there are any human beings who are not persons is absurd.

I once had an email exchange with Richard M. Stallman (rma), a stalwart in the Free Open Source Software movement, about his theory that the soul's attachment to the embryo is in a quantum mechanical superposition of states. It was the only argument I had ever seen from the pro-death side that argued against the humanness of the life in the womb. But I still object to rma's argument because in this case, we should most certainly err on the side of caution, on the one hand, and because his argument essentially assumes what it sets out to prove: that the soul is only fully attached to the body at birth (or at least, that's when we know it is; how rma, with a materialist worldview, can explain the soul in the first place is another matter entirely).

 

[psalms 91]

It is a human being and it is murder and I wish people would stop confusing that with a womans right to choose, she should have no choice when it comes to life of another human being

 

[Stravinsk]

What do I think?

I think that if pro-life people would extend their arguments to wars of aggression, convenience or because of manufactured fear the world might be a slightly better place. A truly strong pro life position would not limit it to the unborn, or the unborn in one's country of residence and pride, or even for the grown for reasons of "national security" "defending our interests", "fighting communism", "fighting for freedom abroad", or "defeating the tactic called terrorism".

Not to assume anyone's positions on these latter things - but I do stand by the definition. A strong pro-life position doesn't limit itself to a subset of people, but extends to everyone and is only compromised by the gravest of circumstances - usually circumstances involving the continued violation of life to begin with. Revenge does not factor into this.

 

[Josiah]

If the pro-choice people actually believed an ounce of their whole argument, then they would give the choice AT LEAST EQUALLY to the unborn child - after all, he or she is the one who is going to be murdered as a result of the "choice." But the argument - which comes lock, stock and barrel from the pro-slavery folks of some years ago - ONLY applies to the powerful over the less powerful. Just as "choice" was entirely, completely, absolutely forbidden to the Black, so the same argument now insists the "choice" is entirely, completely, absolutely forbidden to the unborn. The whole apologetic is a ruse meant to cover-up the real issue: the more powerful trumping the less powerful; might = morality.

Yes, I am opposed to the murder of the innocent after birth, too. There ARE complicated issues of "just war" "self defense" and "capital punishment" (the latter I'm passionately opposed to), in a world populated by 7.3 SINNERS - things are often..... messy, and as stated in the OP, I agree that respect for life and for the least powerful DOES apply equally after the toe exists the birth canal as before that microsecond. I think that "self-defense" (defending one from a very real PHYSICAL thread to one's life) is complicated but perhaps protecting the innocent and defenseless and less powerful - well, the pro-life argument perhaps be applied there (although, again, it's not simple)? "Just war" is an issue I don't claim to understand: WW 2 is perhaps easier..... the Gulf wars probably not - but another issue for a different thread - but yes, the general principles outlined in the OP do apply there.



Thanks to all for reading, considering and responding to the OP



- Josiah

 

[Stravinsk]

^^ That response sounds as if it is in response to my own.

To clarify - I am pro life. However, I do not see the consistency across the spectrum for many people who also say they are pro life. They usually limit it to the unborn, and all other violations for violent aggression (initiating or provoking) are given excuses that show where the loyalties really lie.

 

[Josiah]

^^ That response sounds as if it is in response to my own.

To clarify - I am pro life. However, I do not see the consistency across the spectrum for many people who also say they are pro life. They usually limit it to the unborn, and all other violations for violent aggression (initiating or provoking) are given excuses that show where the loyalties really lie.

As I do in people who say they are "pro-choice."

I suspect you and I are pretty much on the same page here..... (and probably on lots of other stuff, too - LOL)



I must admit - I THOUGHT this would generate at least some debate. I admit too that I struggle to see how surveys (and CERTAINLY voting) seems to indicate most are boldly "Pro-choice" because I live in one of the most socially liberal states in the US and most of my associates are not religious people at all - yet it's pretty hard (for me) to find anyone who is not pro-life. Oh well.....


Thanks everyone!



- Josiah

 

[Josiah]

I mentioned in the OP that when I was in my teens, I volunteered at an "abortion alternative" center (often called "pregnancy crisis" centers). It was called Birth Choice, a not-for-profit, non-sectarian service organization for mothers who choose the alternative of birth rather than abortion.

I was home schooled, but through a big Baptist school. The school had regular classes but also offered a track for home schooling - they supplied the books, the lesson plans, etc. and also did the testing and evaluating. We in that track had a teacher assigned to us and we meet in groups monthly and with our teacher weekly. Nearly all associated with this school were "evangelical" Christians but there were other exceptions and they actually allowed homeschoolers to "opt out" of the Religion stuff. Anyway, the school required quite a lot of volunteering. We had to keep track of the hours and provide documentation of it. Half could be in our church (and I did supply some there) but I did the rest via the BSA (I was a scout for a LONG time) and at Birth Choice. I wanted to do this with Birth Choice because my mom helped them (mostly with donations and fundraising) and because even as a young teen, I was prolife. OBVIOUSLY, they did NOT want a teen BOY involved with helping these mothers (some no older than me), so I was kept behind the scenes. I did office work, I worked in the storeroom (where we kept the food, clothes, diapers, etc.), and I worked with a man who would pick up and deliver stuff (furniture, refirgs, etc). But most of the time, there were no mothers and I could talk with the counselors (all trained women - most either Catholic or LDS). When I started, I was a VERY naive boy - amazingly innocent in this matter. I grew up. My long conversations caused me to really think about my sexuality and to realize what a powerful issue pregnancy is. Sure.... Birth Choice appealed to mothers who WANTED their child (otherwise, they went to Planned Parenthood!) and while these moms there often married (it's wrong that abortions are done mostly to unwed teens), there were a lot of very young and vulnerable girls who had little by way of resources or support except from their parents (and MAYBE the "father").... but they were often very pressured into getting an abortion. Parents wanted the "problem" to go away (and this got clouded in very nice sounding ways)... guys just wanted to avoid 21 years of child support and occasionally a criminal record and possible lifetime designation as a sex offender. And abortions are made free and easy - often "sold" in marked contrast to the obvious high cost of raising a kid. The pressure can be ENORMOUS. Even to the point of kicking out the mother unless she agreed. So much for "pro-CHOICE" (even for the mom - there NEVER is "choice" for the baby). Of course, husbands can apply that pressure, too. Whether the mother is moved by some psychological "bonding" or some biochemistry or just a mother's sense of protection and nurture, many try to resist this extreme PRESSURE they get - from the "father," from their own parents, from "friends." It's an over-used word, but they are often victims. Abortions often create two victims. And yes, a big part of Birth Choice is ongoing grief counseling for those who have had an abortion. Society that doesn't WANT to feel guilty never tells THAT story.... it is to their agenda to relate the whole thing as equal in every way to taking out the garbage: of no greater significance, of no different morality. And.... there's another issue that NEVER gets told: the guys. Sometimes, it's the FATHER who defends the life against the mother - and is hurt when she gets an abortion, killing a child that is EQUALLY his. Yup, we got GUYS coming in for counsel, support - not often, but it happened. A lot of my "stuff" in terms of sexuality and parenthood and male/female relations was formed by those conversations with the counselors and volunteers at that facility.....



Again, thanks



- Josiah

 

[Alithis]

I agree, abortion is murder and I stand strongly in the pro choice corner

be it what ever - if it is not Godly love .. it will defy the perfect law of life .

 

[psalms 91]

be it what ever - if it is not Godly love .. it will defy the perfect law of life .

Love is not committing murder

 

[Alithis]

Love is not committing murder

Yeah... Exactly .

 

[Ruth]

I am pro-life when it comes to myself yet I see what can happen to women when abortion clinics are not available. Women will try to have them anyways and they will and they will often die because they are done by some idiot who doesn't know what they are doing. That happened for years and years and years and years. I am not for abortion as a means of birth control. I feel it should be allowed when the mother's life is in danger to carry out the pregnancy, or she has been raped and got pregnant from it or if the baby is going to die anyway inside of her. And for those reasons only am I pro-choice. I am about saving the mother's life and am not a baby killer.