Thursday, September 18, 2008

Should we ever stand up for anything?

I am not a political person. I don't have the stomach for it. But every now and then I hear something on either side of the political spectrum that causes me to pause as a theologian and clergyman.

So far, both O'Bama and Biden have made it clear that, while they believe life does start at conception, it is "beyond their pay-grade" to protect that life. In other words, they believe it, but not enough to do anything about it.

This is the biggest bunch of bull I have ever heard, and it is statements like this from all politicians (especially in the BS--LCMS--that is, "Beloved Synod" LCMS) that make me want to vomit. How can anyone with two brain cells say that they believe that life begins at conception and then turn around and say that they cannot impose that belief on others by trying to protect what they say is life?? You either believe it is the beginning of life and therefore should be protected as all life should or you don't believe life begins at conception and is therefore open for termination (death) for the betterment of those who are "living." The saddest part is that the retarded Evangelical/Fundamental vote swallows this reasoning hook, line and sinker.

As the Church Lady would say: "Well now, isn't that special?"

4 comments:

Chuck Wiese said...

I agree and I think Issues Etc has done an excellent job dealing with this lately. Rick Warren phrased his question surprisingly well. Rick Warren asked the right political question. He didn't ask when life begins. He asked when a baby has human rights. By his voting record especially in regards to the Born Alive Infant Protection Act, Obama has stated that he doesn't believe a baby has rights even when he is out of the womb.

Obama tried to turn the question into when life begins which is a pretty easy question to answer just from science. The new life begins at the moment of conception. In following interviews Obama tried to then turn this into a question of when a person receives a soul which is even more ridiculous. From a strictly secular perspective I can't even prove that Obama has a soul. It is not the role of government to determine when people have souls or even if they have them.

The debate is really about personhood. When is the life in the mother considered to be a person and worthy of protection under the law? Obama does not provide any criteria for determining personhood. From a scientific perspective it would seem that conception provides the best answer.

McCain has not been the most consistent on the issue of abortion but at least we can hope that he would really appoint some originalist supreme court justices that are. Unfortunately even some of the stronger pro-life candidates have not done the best job in articulating their position. I watched the Bush/Kerry debate and I remember hearing Kerry say the most insane things on a variety of issues and Bush didn't really seem to be paying attention to what Kerry said and responded in an equally absurd way. Kerry talked about how he would not support a ban on partial birth abortion that did not include an exception for the health of the mother. I wanted Bush to fire back and say that it's impossible for the mother to be in danger once the baby is already being pulled out of her but of course he didn't.

From a political perspective I really think this has to be adressed as a civil rights issue. Obama must be portrayed as the Klansman who believes that babies are property and not people. If we were afraid of making laws regarding morally controversial issues we certainly never would have ended slavery. Roe Vs. Wade must be presented as the equivalent to the Dred Scott case. I think it's the only way people really start seeing the importance of the issue.

I think most Americans aren't in favor of abortion are not in favor of abortion but just don't think much about it. Stalin was right when he said, "One death is a tragedy; a million is a statistic." For babies it's 9/11 every day. But we're too concerned with lead paint on Chinese toys that nobody died from or tainted spinach that a few people died from. There seems to be an inverse relationship between news coverage and actual deaths. Unusual deaths make the news more often than deaths caused by things we are used to.

Laura Wiese said...

I second Chuck's agreement! I just watched something the other day on babies that live through their attempted abortions! Lived for hours! But thrown aside to die all alone and no one would/could legally save them. It was so sickening to know that this still happens. (is this 2008?) I wish people would take a true stand for the unborn. Call murder what it is for a change. M-U-R-D-E-R!

Laura Wiese said...

Guess what time it is?

Jud said...

Thank you bro for saying what you think. More of us Christians need the reasoning power and on-our-feet rational/faith thinking that you possess.