"When Herod saw that he had been tricked by the wise men, he was infuriated, and he sent and killed all the children in and around Bethlehem who were two years old or under, according to the time that he had learned from the wise men." This is the "Slaughter of the Innocents," which, to the surprise of some, is not a modern-day news story. In fact, it is a biblical account of mass infanticide that occurred in an ancient society. I found it extremely shocking that I stumbled across an ancient, seemingly "justifiable" form of murder in the Bible.
In America, with the Supreme Court ruling of Roe v. Wade in 1973, legalized slaughter of the innocents began in the strongest, most powerful country in the world, one whose very foundation was built on the value and importance of human life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
In the United States, there are two underlying questions to which one must find answers before the actual problem of abortion is determined to be morally permissible. The first is when does a human life begin? And from that we can ask if murder is acceptable after that point. Let's consider what medical doctors say. Dr. Hayie Gordon of the Mayo Clinic says, "By all criteria of modern molecular biology, life is present from the moment of conception." The fetal heart develops 18 days after conception. Brain waves are produced by six weeks. All organs and bodily systems are in place by eight weeks. The conceived fetus undergoes stages of development, or stages of life. From the very point of conception, the first stage of life has begun. If not for conception, there would be no stages, and therefore no life.
If abortionists ignore this point, they go on to say that life begins when the person is conscious. But this is flawed as well. When you are enjoying a deep sleep, you absolutely are not conscious of what's going around you. Does that make an enemy of yours killing you permissible because you aren't conscious at that point? The previous non-religious arguments only scrape the iceberg concerning the logical and scientific evidence of life being present from the moment of conception. Until this point, the extremely powerful religious argument for life has been excluded. In Psalms 139:13, King David praises God saying, "For it was you who formed my inward parts; you knit me together in my mother's womb." So, clearly, we can see where God stands on this topic, regardless of various half-truths of secular science or selfish popular opinion.
I have a moral and ethical obligation to acknowledge that, since logically, morally and spiritually, the baby in the womb is a life from conception, I must recognize abortion to be murder. Any reasonable person who finds his or her own very life precious and valuable has a duty to acknowledge the same.
The same principles that make your life precious in my eyes, your family's and friends' eyes and God's loving eyes, are the same principles that make any life precious and worthy of protection. The fact that abortion is on demand for the sake of convenience in the overwhelming amount of abortion cases is sickening. Pro-abortionists argue that if the baby is allowed to live then it will be a huge impediment to the life of the woman. Her life would be more difficult. This may be, but what about people who have elderly grandparents or handicapped family members to care for? According to the pro-abortion argument, these people are inconveniences, and inhibit the personal lives of others, so should they be euthanized and disposed with too? This leads to the problem with the flawed idea of moral relativity within the abortionist argument. Once society says that life is not valuable in one instance, it makes life invaluable in all areas. There is no gray area when dealing with the value of life.
All in all, I am personally 100 percent pro-choice and 100 percent pro-life. How? I am pro-choice in that the innocent baby, if given the choice, would choose the inherently natural instinct to live. Also, I am pro-choice in that two people can choose to engage in an activity that might bring about the creation of a human life. Once that choice is made, and conception has occurred, I am 100 percent pro-life. After the choice has been made, the consequences of that decision should be accepted, just as they are with any decision one makes in life.
For example, I need and desire money, so I choose to rob a bank. In doing so, I accept the consequence of going to prison. I can't stand before the judge and say that I shouldn't go to prison because it's an invasion of personal privacy or it'll impede my future plans.
It is very interesting to note that the same arguments used to support slavery are the same ones used by pro-abortionists to justify abortion. Steven Douglass argued for slavery leading up to the Civil War, saying that "they're not persons, but property," "it's a personal religious issue," and "it's a personal choice."
Another pro-abortionist misconception to which I take offense is the idea that abortion is a quick procedure that ends all the problems for the pregnant woman. The fact is, many women are emotionally, mentally and physically harmed because of an abortion. I've heard women speak who've had one and regretted it.
In fact, "Jane Roe," the very same woman that argued for the right to an abortion in the Roe v. Wade case, is now one of the nation's leading advocates against abortion. She and I were among the over 100,000 people that marched for life in Washington. She, like many other women, experienced the horror and harm abortion inflicts, realized the folly of "the right to choose" nonsense, and became pro-life. Pro-life women are the real advocates for women. Those who argue that supporting women's "right" to abortion are missing the fact that abortion hurts women . it is anything but a cure-all solution.
It is so hard to conclude this column because of the plethora of information that so clearly, intelligently, rationally and realistically proves the necessity and importance of the right to life. Adoption is a wonderful alternative to abortion because so many couples, my cousin included, have been on waiting lists for years for a baby to love. Adoption is both safe for the woman and beneficial to the baby. Abortion hurts women in the lon g term much more than it helps them in the short term.
Put simply, it is easy to get caught up in arguments about individual rights and scientific terminology. Really, it is about the objective views of medical doctors, scientists, enlightened women and theologians alike. It is also about the love and the faith that God has knit each of us together in our mother's womb. God has great plans for each of us, whether we have been born, are in the womb or have not yet even been thought of. God knows and loves us so much, and that is ultimately why Jesus Christ sacrificed himself for us. What else is there to say but yes to truly supporting women, and yes to the gift of life?
Information from - godandscience.com
