Tuesday, May 21, 2019

Thoughts on America’s Vile Institution

During the past couple of months, proposed state laws designed to challenge the evil of abortion have been attacked in such a way that exposes its demonic nature. The life of an innocent person is sacrificed on the altar of “Choice” in America the same way that infants were sacrificed on the altar of Moloch in Canaan. 

America, since 1973, has effectively declared that they do not care if the unborn child is a human person. They demand the “right” to abort without interference and any objections to that “right” mean that the opponent is trying to “control women” and “impose their religion on others.”

Objection to abortion, however, is not a means to an end of power. Opposition to abortion is based on the recognition that the unborn child is an innocent human being and no person, no court, has the right to deliberately kill an innocent human being for the benefit of another. Under this view, abortion is simply a violation of human rights.

The issue of abortion is very much like a previous national American sin: the evil of chattel slavery which denied the personhood of certain individuals and gave control over their lives to another [§]. Abolitionists were accused of violating the rights of slave owners, and free states were accused of trying to control slave states. Slave owners could point to the infamous Dred Scott decision to justify a “right” that many (even at the time of the ruling) thought was no right at all [#].

To understand why we must oppose abortion, one needs to understand that we believe that the unborn child is by nature a human person already. It does not “turn into” a person at a certain point in time. Therefore (as mentioned above), no court, no government has the right to decree that one person has the right to kill an innocent person.

That applies regardless of the circumstances of conception. Tragically, Donald Trump, who campaigned for President partially on the grounds of being prolife, announced that he supported exceptions for rape and incest. Some of his supporters have argued that we should be grateful enough for what he has done. Moreover, these cases (even if statistically rare) are extremely hard to come out with the courage to oppose because everyone feels compassion for the victim and nobody wants her to suffer. But the unborn child conceived is a human person. The right to life is not revoked because of rape or incest [*]

People who recognize that abortion is evil need to be aware of the central issue—the human personhood of the unborn child—when faced with offers to compromise. We can never give support or silence over the deliberate killing of an innocent human being. Appeals to “choice” or circumstances or “Constitutional Right” can never be accepted as valid. This is true regardless of religion or political stance.


[§] While slave states eventually put legal restrictions on deliberately killing slaves, no slave owner was ever prosecuted.

[#] Moreover, when one reads Roe v. Wade, it’s a nightmarish collection of irrationality and illogic. It argues that there’s no consensus for when life begins. It argues that our Constitutional rights only refer to people who are already born. None of the claims made in the ruling logically proves that life only begins at a certain point. It can only argue, “we don’t know when life begins, so go ahead and abort!” In all other circumstances, that’s reckless endangerment or manslaughter at the minimum. 

[*] Some Christians and Jews have argued that abortion is justified under resisting the unjust aggressor. But that loses sight of the fact that the unborn child is a separate person from mother or father. The rapist is the unjust aggressor. Not the child. Abortion in this case only adds a second victim (the child) to the evil done. The proper response is support (physical, emotional) for the mother.

No comments:

Post a Comment