It's been awhile since my last blog post - nearly a month - but that is only because I try to write when I have something to say, which I haven't for a long time, perhaps not even now. There is one thing that's been on my mind lately, however.
Living in Missoula and going to a public university, I've met a lot of different people from so many different backgrounds I can't even count anymore. This is in no way a bad thing, in fact I love hearing people's stories and respect each person's history. There is one thing I won't stand for, though, and that's when other people tell me that my story and beliefs, or those of a friend, are not valid. Throughout my life I have come up against people who think that their story is more important than mine, or that, because I was homeschooled, I must be bigoted or repressed or even "closed-minded". What frustrates me the most is that people are always saying that diversity is key, and yet they do not allow me to explain my story.
While I am not going to post my entire life's story on this blog, there is one thing you should know about me: I'm adopted. And yes, I'm going to touch on a hot-button issue in this blog, so help me, God. I live with a girl who works for Planned Parenthood, I work with men and women who believe abortion is a right. I listen to their side of the argument politely, nod my head, and smile. I respect their right to their opinion. Here's my problem: when I open my mouth to respond in kind with my opinion, I'm shot down immediately. No time is given to my side of the argument. Why? I'm extremely pro-life and I am a Christian, two social faux pas in this world. Now, before you stop reading, let me say that myself being adopted is only a fraction of my reason for being pro-life. My having faith in a Creator and, specifically Christ Jesus as redeemer, is the driving force behind my worldview.
My case: Due to my worldview I see life as a borrowed convention, hence the name of my blog. I see everything on earth as a gift from a graceful, merciful, terrifying God. "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made. In him was life, and the life was the light of men." (John 1:1-4, ESV) Because of this fact, life is not something that I have any control over. Honestly, this is a relief. If I had control over my life, I would either be a deadbeat living under a bridge somewhere with no teeth, no money, and probably a bottle of grain alcohol in a crumpled paper bag, or worse; dead. This also means I never have the choice of suicide. I cannot decide when my life begins, so I am not able to decide when my life ends. Another load off my back.
Along with all of this comes the issue of infant life. Now, dissenters will stop me there and say, "well, when does life start?" I say, if you are going to dissect it that far, then we already have a problem. And this is that problem: sex has become casual; I myself have fallen pray to that ideology. But it isn't. Sex was given as a gift to man to breathe intimacy into a relationship and for procreation. Notice the conjunction used and lack of puncuation in that statement. "To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is good for them to remain single as I am. But if they cannot exercise self-control, they should marry. For it is better to marry than to burn with passion." (1 Cor. 7:8-9) Even the apostle Paul understood that passion is normal, and we have a perfect outlet for it.
That is all very fine and well, you say, but what about rape? What about incest? Should a woman have to pay for the crimes committed against her? Who said anything about having to pay? If a child is given it is God's will and plan for that child to be given and would have been whether or not a crime had been committed. Does that mean I condone sin and criminal activity? Absolutely not! I do, however, say that if a child is not meant for this earth, God will prepare a way, but it is not within our jurisdiction as sojourners, as it were, to decide that way. There has also been quite a bit of discussion around me lately over genetic testing of fetuses for diseases and handicaps. To that I plead motive. If a parent's motive is to discover a disease that could be cured in the womb and make a mother and baby healthy I am all for it. However, if the motive is to find an abnormality and abort, I see that as cruel and nigh-on pathetic. If you are so lazy as to abort a child who has a birth defect or handicap of any kind, I pray that baby is adopted and you are never allowed access to them again.
All of that to say, I am blatently against abortion. Who knows who each of the roughly 800,000 yearly US aborted children (http://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/data_stats/Abortion.htm) would have become? I can't say, and neither can you. As for Planned Parenthood, I will not bash all of what they do. I know many men and women who go to them for support and healthcare reasons outside of abortion, and that abortion is a small fraction of what they do. I hear that, I understand that, and I commend it.
However, let me show you a quote from Planned Parenthood's founder, Margaret Sanger:
"Our failure to segregate morons who are increasing and multiplying... demonstrates our foolhardy and extravagant sentimentalism ... [Philanthropists] encourage the healthier and more normal sections of the world to shoulder the burden of unthinking and indiscriminate fecundity of others; which brings with it, as I think the reader must agree, a dead weight of human waste. Instead of decreasing and aiming to eliminate the stocks that are most detrimental to the future of the race and the world, it tends to render them to a menacing degree dominant ... We are paying for, and even submitting to, the dictates of an ever-increasing, unceasingly spawning class of human beings who never should have been born at all."
(Margaret Sanger. The Pivot of Civilization , 1922. Chapter on "The Cruelty of Charity," pages 116, 122, and 189. Swarthmore College Library edition.)
Does reading that give you the warm fuzzies? No? Why not? There isn't a sanctity to life, is there? If there is, then who gave it to us? If there isn't, why stop at abortion and not allow murder and genocide to continue? If we're all merely "morons" and aren't worth the allowance to breed, why not kill us off and allow only those deemed good enough to continue the human race? I realize I am taking some cheap shots here, but stop to think before you get mad. What are the basic principles to which you ascribe when you label yourself as "pro-life" or "pro-choice"?
I do not ask you to agree with me, though I sincerely hope that you do. What I do ask is that you know why you believe what you believe and have good, solid reasons for your worldview. Do not become one of the herd of internet-dwellers who says they know anything because they can look it up in the blink of an eye yet never do, and are rendered intellectually incapacitated. Know why you believe what you believe and then start conversations to further your understanding and allow time for both sides of the argument to be heard.
"A good leader can engage in a debate frankly and thoroughly, knowing that at the end he and the other side must be closer, and thus emerge stronger. You don't have that idea when you are arrogant, superficial, and uninformed." - Nelson Mandela
"Those who cannot understand how to put their thoughts on ice should not enter into the heat of debate." - Friedrich Nietzsche
No comments:
Post a Comment