The Ripple Effect of Abortion

“Abortion seems to be the only medical procedure that people want to deny you based on how you got in that situation.

Drove drunk, got in an accident and need an organ transplant? No problem.

Messing around with a gun, accidentally shoot yourself in the leg and need surgery? Of course.

Smoke tobacco for most of your life and need treatment for lung cancer? Yep.

Climb a tree, fall out and break your leg? We’ll fix that right up.

Have sex and get pregnant when you don’t want to be? YOU GOT YOURSELF INTO THIS SITUATION AND YOU DESERVE NO MEDICAL HELP OR COMPASSION! THIS IS YOUR FAULT AND YOU WILL DEAL WITH THE CONSEQUENCES!”

—– Worry About Your Own Uterus (via quoilecanard)

I don’t normally care a lot about people arguing about abortion. I feel there is a lot of baggage associated with the pro-life, pro-choice debate. In that, I don’t think a lot of pro-choice arguments are about whether a baby is being killed in abortion, but the whole issue is intrinsically tied with feminism. Therefore, it is difficult to engage the abortion debate when the two sides aren’t talking about the same thing.

Regardless, I stumbled across this little tib-bit on tumblr. There is obviously a great amount of hyperbole, and a bit of irrelevance. I don’t think that a hospital is really a good idea of what is morally right or wrong.

It also disturbs me that the writer has compared having a baby to: [having] lung cancer”, “breaking a leg”, or “[receiving an] organ transplant”. Moreover, that having sex is like “smoking tobacco”, “driving drunk”, or “falling out of trees”.


The Ripple Effect.

The core of my problem with this argument is that none of those examples given involve a life outside of the person’s own life. It’s not very much like you drove drunk and got into an accident because that is all about your own life’s preservation.

Abortion has a much greater far-reaching impact on not only yourself and whatever you’ve done to yourself, but your own unborn child. It has not been engaged with properly by the author, but some rather fantastic analogies have been given for an abortion.

The Reality.

The reality goes more like this:

It’s more like you were driving home from a dinner with your girlfriend. You had a few glasses of wine, but not that much that you thought it wasn’t safe to drive home. On the way home, you didn’t stop at a red light. It somehow slipped your mind as you were thinking about work the next day. The car door has been wrenched open, where you T-boned the car at the intersection.

You start mumbling in a drunken haze:

“WHYYY ARE YOU IN MY WAYYYY?!”.

You then begin to explain your conditions. You expect the person to pay for the repairs to your own car, and not to call the police or anything. Basically, you begin to demand to the body that they don’t interfere with your life and to pretend that nothing happened. After a while, when the body doesn’t respond you realize that the person you crashed into is actually dead and you’re actually just talking to a bloodied corpse.

Maybe the corpse is on fire and the clothes have burnt off leaving a naked body. You shake the limp body and ask for compensation for your own mistake and lack of foresight.

After a while, you become sober, and you walk home. The police never come knocking at your door. The whole car disappears overnight, the midnight bells have caused the carriage to revert to its former state. The shards of broken windshield scattered on the road the night before is no more when you drive to work the next day. It’s almost like it was a dream.

It is blatantly obvious if you drive drunk, you have an increased chance of crashing into someone and causing loss of life. If you have sex with someone without a condom, you have an increased (well, almost 100% greater) chance of having a baby.

There is a risk taken. Abortion immediately assumes that there is a positive and negative side to this coin flip. It has this idea that life is always great or unimportant according to someone who doesn’t know anything about the person they just crashed into.

The Solution.

Christians fail in this department. More often than not, they are too willing to condemn babies born outside of wedlock because it makes them feel good about a sin they are not guilty of. More often than not, there needs to be a sense of humility and service to people that are unlike us.

On the reverse, the condemnation they dish out, they create an environment that distances rather than draws sinners close. Admittedly, I am one of those who would be more likely to be standing outside abortion clinics, but you would never see me supporting the single mothers. You never see me play an important part of raising these babies not judged as interference to life. It’s so much easier to wave signs and say sermons to people for a short time, rather than invest a lifetime into seeing someone grow to value life and what a gift that God has given.

Don’t miss the forest for the trees. Don’t miss the babies for the political stance.

The Church needs to be that vehicle the gives the help and the compassion.

Advertisements

Love the sinner, hate your own sin.

“That’s just the opposite of what Jesus said. Jesus never said love the sinner and hate the sin. Here’s what Jesus said, love the sinner, and hate your own sin, and after you have taken care of that sin, you can talk about the sin in your brother.”

-Tony Campolo

I was listening to Campolo’s keynote speech at the Christian Gay Conference 2009 the other day. While I didn’t agree with much that he had to say, he often seems like a sensationalist too much of the time. I was interested in how he would give the message seeing as he holds a traditionalist position in that he thought that homosexuality was a sin, and homosexual should be eunuchs the rest of their lives. I’m not going to comment on what he had to say, but he did say the above quote during the talk. I quite like it to be honest. It is still a slogan, but what he points out is of greater impact and accuracy than the more popular: “love the sinner and hate the sin”.

I find so often I am at a loss as to how to react to homosexuals. I find it frustrating trying to discuss the biblical principles behind marriage and the explicit references towards what marriage is supposed to be. It seems that while I am trying to be open-minded and considering what they have to say, there also seems to be a certain amount of closemindedness among homosexuals as well. I don’t on the one hand want to be hateful which is how I’ve reacted in the past, with much malice out of frustration. But I find not only in myself, but a lot of Christians don’t want to bring homosexuals gently out of sin, but seek more to objectify them with hate to elevate themselves as not that bad at all. What I think about the quote from Campolo is effective in is the movement of the condemnation from others unto ourselves. The object of hate should be our own sin, and our own malice should be our depravity.

I read a very telling comment from Travis the other day, on lonelywanderer‘s blog. I’ve been thinking how much truth is in the comment:

“Build relationships, show love, and invite them into the kingdom of God (which requires repentance). Relationships are much harder than boycotts and protests. It’s easy as hell to hold up a sign. It’s hard as heaven to get humble and love people you have difficulty understanding or appreciating.” 8/27/2010 9:36 PM

The context of the comment is different from the topic at hand and was in reference to strippers protesting outside churches in revenge for loss of business for their protesting. I think the same principle applies here, Travis was saying is that we must be engaged with others if we hope to change them instead of distancing ourselves from them. When Jesus sums up the Law and the Prophets in Matthew 6, he outlines the two subjects, firstly God, and then others, both of which are movement of a focus from yourself, to others. These two actions are love. And love shouldn’t be extended to homosexual exclusively, but also to the heterosexual because we are all of the same flesh. The same flesh that is tarnished by the sin of Adam, and cleansed and renewed by the blood of Jesus Christ, the Second Adam.

Therefore, we should constantly be in remembrance of our own sins, and our own shortcomings. This removes any arrogance in our hearts, and any pride that may make us irrelevant to these people. Whenever the gospel is preached it is founded on the illumination of the Word of God, not the works of the preacher. The transfer in focus from us to God, would help us begin to relate to homosexuals on the same horizontal plane.

“”Now concerning food offered to idols: we know that “all of us possess knowledge.” This “knowledge” puffs up, but love builds up. If anyone imagines that he knows something, he does not yet know as he ought to know.But if anyone loves God, he is known by God.” 1 Corinthians 8:1-3 (English Standard Version)

I have this “knowledge”, the reality is that I know so little, I try to cover up this with being overly critical with others. While I think they are totally wrong, I don’t do it with love, I don’t do it because I want them to be stronger in Christ. I want to pull them down to my level, by invoking a response and creating anger, I show it with a tirade of cuss words against people I dislike because of their tendencies towards eisegesis.

So, if we can begin to make sense of that, we should be loving people. I don’t mean love in the sense of tolerance that anything goes, but also so intolerable that we will not reason. I mean love in humility as a bold tool for spreading the Gospel, meek and gracious, bending but not breaking. I believe that homosexuality is a sin, reasonably clear in Scriptures like 1Corinthians6 and Romans1, even in the larger context people argue that it is a rhetoric technique used by Paul. Yet, though I know this knowledge, there is no love in my message. I don’t want the homosexuals to change, they just want to show they are better than them. But I what I should do is focus on myself, and my own struggle with other sins and translate that to a relatable and more cohesive message.

So, of utmost importance in relationships with homosexuals is humility because we are hardly any better. Understanding their struggle is imperative to begin to influence their lives to become more like Christ, who resisted all the temptations we experienced and did not fall.

At some thoughts a man stands perplexed, above all at the sight of human sin, and he wonders whether to combat it by force or by humble love. Always decide: ‘I will combat it by humble love.’ If you resolve on that once for all, you can conquer the whole world. Loving humility is a terrible force: it is the strongest of all things, and there is nothing else like it.”-Zosima (from Starets, by Fyodor Dostoyevsky)

What sins do you see in others that you don’t see in yourself?