Sunday, October 19, 2008

The Poor and the Unborn: Part 2

[Also see Part 1]

The issues that you listed as debatable are issues that, I agree, have leeway. However, they are none of the ones mentioned in my post. Where do you get your five issues? Obviously they are integral to your faith. They're integral to mine, but they are not my top five. I listed the issues that burden my heart, and they are just as biblical as yours.

You consider abortion, euthanasia, embryonic stem cell research, human cloning, and homosexual marriage to be the non-negotiable issues. Interestingly enough, with most of those we must extrapolate how Christ feels on them based on His character and Old Testament Scripture. I don't disagree with you on your interpretation, but it should be noted that He spoke directly about taking care of the hungry and the sick, which leads me to believe where His heart lay.
Can you give me the source for your statement [in the first post] that "More people died worldwide from hunger in one year than have died from abortion nationwide in twenty-five years." I’m interested to analyze those numbers. Also, don’t forget that abortion statistics of the Guttmacher Institute and the CDC don’t even consider the abortifacent effects of birth control medications. The numbers would skyrocket if we were somehow able to take that into account.

Regarding your reply to me, are you saying that world hunger is a more important issue than abortion? Also, I agree that both of our issues are biblical, but that does not mean they are equal in gravity.

It's unfair to use "probably" when referring to these candidates opinions. Facts are what we must rely on when making this decision. And the fact is, abortions performed in the US spiked in 1981 and have steadily decreased since (www.guttmacher.org). It's also inappropriate to call Obama "disingenuous" because you do not know him, nor his heart. With a few exceptions, I think it *is* fair to say that no one likes abortion.
You said that abortions have steadily decreased since 1981, but that's not true. According to the CDC, the annual number of legal induced abortions in the United States increased gradually from 1973 until it peaked in 1990, and it generally declined thereafter. But why even point out the decrease? Does that make it less wrong?

Regarding Obama's character, I don't have to personally know the man to know when he's being disingenuous. Just look at his words and compare them to his record. He sugarcoats it like you wouldn't believe, and anytime you bring it up you get accused of attacking his character. His campaign would rather you not even know what his stance on abortion is. The topic is nowhere to be found on the "Issues" page of his website, even though it's always been one of the most important issues to Americans. Weird, huh?

Honestly, Nick, you have to look at the fact that women have had abortions since they've discovered that sex makes them pregnant. Making it illegal doesn't make it go away, but keeping it the way it is and putting our focus on providing women with better options is what will make a difference. I can say that because it *has* made a difference.
So, since women have always aborted their babies and they probably always will, that means we should just keep it legal? We make things illegal b/c they are wrong, b/c they are detrimental to society and to its citizens. Abortion definitely falls in that category. People will always rape, and steal, and break the speed limit, but we still have laws against those things. We simply cannot allow this atrocity to take place any longer, and no amount of “better options” will end the genocide like a law against abortion will.

You’re against abortion but you’re still voting for Obama. Why? Because you think he’ll be able to provide “better options for women” than McCain will? Because you think he’ll be “better on the poor”? Both of those reasons are far from provable, and a case could easily be made that McCain will in fact be better on both. There is, however, one thing we know for certain: Obama will do more than just keep abortion legal. He will unleash abortion in all its fury upon this country. No laws that restrict it in any way, and tax-payer funded. That’s what the Freedom of Choice Act is all about, and he’s promised that as president he will pass this bill. If you are against abortion, how can you vote for someone who will just fight for its increase?

What Christians need to understand is that there is no issue in this election that is proportionate in gravity to abortion and thus no issue that would justify voting for Obama in light of his abortion record. He’s wrong on a few other non-negotiable issues as well, which just makes a vote for him even worse.

I never wrote one word about Obama's economic policy. I'm not suggesting we put the abortion issue aside, I'm suggesting we look at it from a different angle. It hurts my feelings that you would suggest that I care more about the economy than the life of even one human being, especially when I did not indicate such a perspective.
The reason I mentioned economic policy is b/c I thought it was his economic policies that were going to somehow decrease the poverty level in this country and the # of abortions, two things that you are against. I just happen to think that his policies will do neither. Also, you're right, the sanctity of human life does not end at abortion .... it BEGINS there. Human beings have a right to life before any other right. We must protect that right before we can protect the others. The others aren't even on the table without life.

No comments:

Related Posts with Thumbnails