Monday, January 31, 2011

Where God Stands on Abortion

        "Where do you stand on abortion?" Each of us will fall into one of three categories in answer to that question. We will either support abortion, oppose abortion, or be neutral. The more important question, however, is this: "Where does God stand on abortion?" The answer to that question is easily determined by scripture.

        When Mary went to visit her relative Elizabeth, we read, "And when Elizabeth heard the greeting of Mary, the baby leaped in her womb. And Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit, and she exclaimed with a loud cry, 'Blessed are you among women and blessed is the fruit of your womb! And why is this granted to me that the mother of my Lord should come to me? For behold, when the sound of your greeting came to my ears, the baby in my womb leaped for joy" (Luke 1:41-44). Notice that the word "baby" is used to describe the unborn child in Elizabeth's womb. That is the same word (brephos) used to describe a child after birth (Luke 2:12). Hence, God views those in the womb and those out of the womb the same -- both are babies!

        When Rebekah was pregnant with twins, we read, "The children struggled together within her, and she said, 'If it is thus, why is this happening to me?' So she went to inquire of the Lord" (Genesis 25:22). Notice that the word "children" is used to describe the unborn twins. That is the same word (ben) used to describe a child after birth (Genesis 21:7). Hence, God views those in the womb and those out of the womb the same -- both are children!

        Some argue that abortion is not murder because the fetus has not yet received the "breath of life" spoken of in Genesis 2:7. However, that passage speaks specifically about Adam, one who sprang into existence fully grown having been formed from the dust of the ground. That was a unique situation. The rest of us receive the "breath of life" long before we begin to breathe independently of our mothers. We breathe (i.e., receive oxygen) through our mothers from the moment of conception.

        In Exodus 21:22-25, the law addressed a situation in which a pregnant woman was accidentally struck during a fight. If neither the woman nor the child was harmed, a fine was levied against the man who struck her. However, if the woman or child died, the man was to be executed -- life for life! This passage clearly considers the unborn child to be a human being.

        It is interesting to note that in the above passage, the law was addressing a situation in which injury or death occurred accidentally. Abortion is a deliberate termination of the child's life. If God dealt that severely with the accidental death of an unborn child, how do you suppose He feels about the deliberate death of an unborn child?

        God has a special relationship with the unborn (Job 10:8-12; Psalm 139:13-16; Jeremiah 1:4-5). No conception ever occurs that is not the result of His creative purpose (Genesis 17:16; 21:2; Ruth 4:13). Obviously, God opposes abortion!

Copyright 2011 

Harrison's Abortion Clinic

Dr. William F. Harrison
        On November 29, 2005 an article entitled "Offering Abortion, Rebirth" appeared in the Los Angeles Times. The article was written by Stephanie Simon and featured a prominent abortionist named Dr. William F. Harrison of Fayetteville, Arkansas. Harrison began performing abortions shortly after the Supreme Court's decision in 1973, and he estimates that he has terminated "at least 20,000 pregnancies."

        Harrison has no problem calling himself an "abortionist" and readily admits, "I am destroying life." He is also quoted as saying, "It's not a baby to me until the mother tells me it's a baby." Harrison has convinced himself that by taking life he is also giving life. He says, "When you end what the woman considers a disastrous pregnancy, she has literally been given her life back." He even borrows the biblical expression "born again" to describe his patients.

        In the article, we are introduced to several women visiting the clinic. One woman was a 35-year-old named Kim. She was in for her "second abortion in two years." We are also introduced to 20-year-old Amanda, who says, "It's not like I'm doing anything wrong." She attributes her strength to have an abortion to prayer, adding, "I really believe God has a plan for us all. I have a choice, and that's part of my plan." Amanda never even told the father of her child nor her parents with whom she lives that she was pregnant.

        Sarah, age 23, became pregnant while planning her wedding. She remarks, "I don't think my dress would have fit with a baby in there." Stephanie, age 32, has had "four abortions in the last 12 years." She calls abortion "a bummer, but no big stress." A high school volleyball player says she doesn't want to give up her body for nine months, and an 18-year-old says she wants to have "a good life."
       
        A 17-year-old in for a consultation assures the nurse that she does not consider the unborn child to be a baby. "Not until it's developed," she says. The nurse tries to ease the girl by replying, "Yours is more like a chicken yolk." The girl then concludes, "Then no, it's not a baby." The girl's mother was crying over in the corner.

        Harrison delivered 6,000 babies before giving up obstetrics in 1991. However, he tells Simon that he has no plans to give up the practice of killing them. The article ends with a promise by Harrison to continue performing abortions and the sobering words: "Three abortions before lunch and three more after: The appointment book is always full."

        [Addendum: Dr. Harrison died on September 24, 2010 at the age of 75. An article on Daily Kos called Harrison "an outspoken atheist."]  

Copyright 2011

Sunday, January 30, 2011

The Insanity of Abortion

        In the November 2004 edition of Harper's Magazine, Cynthia Gorney wrote an article entitled "Gambling with abortion: Why both sides think they have everything to lose." It states that the late Dr. James McMahon of Los Angeles "had made a speciality of performing late intacts and then bringing the fetuses to women who had asked to see them." His widow, Gale McMahon, told Gorney, "Having it intact was a goal, so they could do that, and have this closure." She then went on to say, "I knew what it meant to these women, to be able to hold them, and be able to coo over them and say goodbye. It was profound. I got material, and sewed little tiny sheaths, and we got tiny hats we could dress them in. I would put them on a clean cloth, and I would swathe them. Many women spent hours in there, and showed them to their other children. It was always treating the babies with the respect the parents would want them to."
       
        What! Here are mothers who kill their babies and then want to "hold them" and "coo over them." Just moments after the abortion they dress the baby up and show it to their other children. And what is this talk about treating the baby with "respect?"

        An article by John Hooper entitled "Italian police to investigate abortion of wrong twin" states that doctors in Italy killed the wrong baby during an abortion. The twins had changed places in the womb just before the procedure. The mother returned to the hospital to have the remaining baby aborted and then reported the doctors to police. The same article states that a baby was aborted during the 22nd week of pregnancy at a hospital in Florence "because of suspected deformities." However, when it was discovered that the baby was not deformed "it was rescuscitated and survived for a brief period."

        An abortionist in Philadelphia was charged with severing the spinal cords of babies that were born alive. He is suspected of "killing hundreds of living babies" over the course of his 30-year practice. Tammy Skinner was full-term when she shot herself in the stomach to abort her child in Virginia. Since she technically did not "kill the fetus of another," as the law states, the case was dismissed. A couple in Australia aborted twin boys because they want a baby girl. "Gendercide" is literally taking place in parts of China and India. With lists like this, insanity may be an understatement!
       
Copyright 2011   

Saturday, January 29, 2011

Informed Decisions Save Lives

        On February 2, 2005 an article entitled "Church Groups Turn to Sonogram to Turn Women From Abortions" appeared in The New York Times. It was written by Neela Banerjee, and highlighted the effectiveness of ultrasound machines in changing the minds of women seeking an abortion. Below is an excerpt of the article.
Sixteen months ago, Andrea Brown, 24 years old and unmarried, was desperate for an abortion, fearing the disappointment of her parents and the humiliation she might face. 
While frantically searching the telephone book one day, she came across the Bowie Crofton Pregnancy Center and Medical Clinic, a church-financed organization that provides counseling and education about sexual abstinence. The receptionist told Ms. Brown that the clinic did not perform abortions or make referrals but that she could come in for an ultrasound to make sure her six-and-a-half-week pregnancy was viable. When she did, everything changed.
"When I had the sonogram and heard the heartbeat -- and for me a heartbeat symbolizes life -- after that there was no way I could do it," Ms. Brown said recently as she revisited the clinic and watched her daughter, Elora, now 9 months old, play at her feet.
        Here was a woman who wanted an abortion. Yet an ultrasound changed her mind and saved a life. The article says that a survey found "that those using counseling alone reported persuading 70 percent of women considering abortion to abandon the idea. In centers with ultrasound machines, that number jumped to 90 percent."

        It is no surprise that pro-abortion forces oppose legislation that would require a woman considering abortion to have an ultrasound. They know that the more informed the woman is in making her decision, the less likely she is to choose abortion. They want the woman to make a quick decision without all the facts. Truly, informed decisions save lives!

Copyright 2011       

Abortion: The Lesser Evil?

        On June 30, 2010 an article entitled "Yes, abortion is killing. But it's the lesser evil" appeared in The Times [London]. It was written by Antonia Senior, a devoted feminist. Her perspective on the abortion issue is very telling.

        Senior affirms that from conception an unborn child is a human life. She writes, "What seems increasingly clear to me is that, in the absence of an objective definition, a fetus is a life by any subjective measure. My daughter was formed at conception, and all the barely understood alchemy that turned the happy accident of that particular sperm meeting that particular egg into my darling, personality-packed toddler took place at that moment." She even criticizes those within the pro-choice movement who deny that an unborn child is a life. "Any other conclusion is a convenient lie that we on the pro-choice side of the debate tell ourselves to make us feel better about the action of taking a life."

        Wow! Not only does Senior admit that an unborn child is a life, but she also says that those who deny it are lying to make themselves feel better about the action of taking a life! What comes next, however, is even more shocking.

        Senior seems headed in the right direction. Usually, if one comes to the realization that an unborn child is a life they reject abortion. Not Senior, however. She argues that the feminist agenda trumps life, and therefore abortion is justifiable. She writes, "But you cannot separate women's rights from their right to fertility control... The nearly 200,000 aborted babies in the UK each year are the lesser evil... If you are willing to die for a cause, you must be prepared to kill for it, too."

        According to Senior, the feminist agenda must be defended at all costs -- even if that cost is hundreds of thousands of dead babies! Their brutal slayings are "the lesser evil." Such insanity reminds me of the conclusions of abortionist Dr. William F. Harrison in an article entitled "Why I Provide Abortions." He wrote, "No one, neither the patient receiving an abortion, nor the person doing the abortion, is ever, at anytime, unaware that they are ending a life. We just don't believe that a developing embryo or fetus whose mother cannot or will not accept it, has the same moral claims on us, claims to autonomy and justice that an adolescent or adult woman has."

        It is hard for any decent person to stomach the reasoning of Antonia Senior. While we should all want equal rights for women, minorities, etc., it is outrageous and wrong to suggest that the feminist agenda is more important than human life. No, abortion is not the lesser evil!

Copyright 2011

Abortion and Politics

        Many people want to keep politics out of the abortion issue. However, given the fact that abortion is the hot-button political issue of the day it is impossible to do so. Abortion and other moral issues have been politicized. There is no denying that fact. Does that mean they are now off limits? Does that mean we can talk about the issue but not those advocating it? We have a duty to speak out against all evil practices and those who promote them.

        Below is an article entitled "Religion in Politics?" by a preacher named Dave Miller. The article was published in Reason & Revelation and was posted on the Apologetics Press website.
Many Americans will go to the polls this week to indicate their choice of political leaders. It has long been a common sentiment that "religion and politics don't mix" -- meaning that one should keep these two spheres separate and distinct, and that political preference be exercised without the interference of religious opinion. But the Bible contradicts this notion. For the faithful Christian, God's will naturally permeates every aspect of life and takes precedence over everything and everyone (Matthew 6:33). Every thought and every action is subjected to the scrutiny of Scripture (2 Corinthians 10:5). While many decisions in life are left by God to individual taste and personal preference, nevertheless, every area of life must be approached with a proper understanding of moral and spiritual principles that may impinge on one's decision-making. The Christian is free to form a personal opinion on many political questions -- from whether the government should fund healthcare, social security, and public education, to how foreign policy should be conducted. No one's soul is jeopardized by the stance taken on these matters. Nor has God ever destroyed cities or nations on account of these political concerns.
But we must face the fact that religious and moral issues are being politicized. Just because politicians seize upon these issues, dragging them into the political arena, does not mean that they are exempt from religious scrutiny. The two premiere moral issues confronting the nation are same-sex marriage and the butchery of unborn babies (from abortion to embryonic stem cell research). Like the great prophets of old (e.g., Amos 7:10ff.; Mark 6:17-18), Christians have the divine obligation to stand firm against all politicians who support such evil behaviors. Indeed, our voting should be guided by the same principle articulated by Jehu when he challenged Jehoshaphat's political affiliation with King Ahab: "Should you help the wicked and love those who hate the Lord?" (2 Chronicles 19:2).
        One cannot deny that the Democratic Party is the party of abortion, while the Republican Party is the party of life. Typically, Democratic Presidents veto bills that would restrict abortion or limit its funding, and appoint judges who will uphold the Roe v. Wade decision. On the other hand, Republican Presidents sign bills that would restrict abortion or limit its funding, and appoint judges who are pro-life. I say that not as a partisan, but as a Christian. We need to support those who most-closely reflect our values, and that is clearly the Republican Party at the present time.

        I understand that both parties have their faults. The Republican Party is certainly not perfect, or even close to it. However, when it comes to the moral issues of the day the Republican Party, generally speaking, is the one that embraces conservative values. It is the one that opposes abortion, cloning, gay marriage, and other sinful practices. Vote Life! 

Copyright 2011

Abortion Hurts!

        The "National Memorial for the Unborn" in Chattanooga, Tennessee stands where an abortion clinic once stood. It is a place for mothers to honor their aborted babies. It is also a constant reminder of the lingering pain of abortion.

        In the July 2006 issue of Think, we are introduced to a woman named Nancy Carmel, who chose to abort her baby years ago. She said that "women undergoing abortion have no idea what suffering they will encounter after the abortion, and daily for the rest of their lives, when it suddenly dawns on them that they chose to extinguish a precious life." She goes on to say that the guilt of killing your child "eats away at your soul continually, like a ravenous cancer, causing one to pray for a quick demise." The pain is only intensified by thoughts of what the child would be like. She says, "You will always wonder if the fetus was male or female, what he or she would look like. Yearly, you will mournfully recall the day your baby was ripped from your body, only to be carelessly tossed into a garbage pail at your side."

        Elaine Rotondo had two abortions before giving birth to three daughters. In the January 1990 issue of Decision, she spoke of the pain she suddenly felt years after the abortions. She explained, "But driving home from the supermarket one afternoon, I found myself thinking about two other children from my past. Those two I had never fussed over. In fact, I had tried to forget them entirely. Before now I had not even called them children. I had called them abortions." She recalled pulling her car to the shoulder of the road and wondering how old they would be and what color eyes they would have. Elaine continued, "I fought off the sickening reality that was rising in my mind. The full impact of what I had done so many years before was finally upon me. 'They were alive,' I said out loud. 'They were children!'" For the first time, she acknowledged that she had taken the lives of her children and "cried out to the tiny souls who never had felt their mother's arms." She "longed for them" and "wept for a long time" wishing that the very mountains would cover her and hide the guilt.

        Statistics show that many women suffer significant psychological pain after an abortion. Feelings of guilt, anger, depression, grief, regret, sorrow, shame, loneliness, etc. have all been reported. There is also evidence that suggests an increased risk of miscarriages, premature births, bleeding, and breast cancer in women who have had an abortion.

        Although the actual procedure may be done in a relatively short time, the lingering pain of abortion often lasts a lifetime. Abortion hurts!
       
Copyright 2011       

Forced Abortions in China

        An Associated Press article entitled "Husband: China Forces Wife to Abort at 8 months" states that a pregnant woman in China was beaten and forced to have an abortion by family planning officials for violating the country's one-child limit.

        According to her husband, the woman was taken "kicking and screaming" from their home on October 10, 2010 and detained in a clinic for three days. She was then transported to a hospital and injected with a drug that killed her baby.

        Though illegal, the article states that "police and judicial authorities often look the other way when forced abortion cases are reported and the heavily censored state media shy away from such news." The woman's husband says the police told him that "family planning issues weren't their responsibility."

        Unfortunately, forced abortion cases in China are not rare. A 2007 article entitled "Cases of Forced Abortions Surface in China" states that "dozens of women in southwest China" were forced to have abortions, some of whom were nine months pregnant.

        The article features a woman named Wei Linrong, who was seven months pregnant when she was forced to have an abortion by family planning officials. She recalled, "The hospital was full of women who'd been brought in forcibly. There wasn't a single spare bed. The family planning people said forced abortions and forced sterilizations were both being carried out. We saw women being pulled in one by one." Another woman, He Caigan, was nine months pregnant when family planning officials showed up at her house before dawn and forced her to go to the hospital. Although the child was her first, she was forced to have an abortion because she had not married the father.

        China is clearly using abortion as a means of population control. Pregnant women are being abducted from their homes and forced to abort their babies. How sad! It is hard for America to throw stones, however, knowing that many in our own country, though unforced, use abortion as a means of birth control and gender selection every day. When will the brutality end?

Copyright 2011