Friday, March 18, 2005

Abortion

This is the topic that many people use as a litmus test for their political vote. With very strong opinions on either side. Rabid in fact. For those that I am about to offend, I apologize in advance. I just hope I offend both sides equally. Abortion is wrong. A late term abortion is seen as wrong by more people than an earlier term abortion. Partial birth abortion is certainly a horrific murder as I see it. Abortion in the first trimester, I don’t know. I can only say that: I don’t know.

Before I had children I was much more liberal regarding this matter. I wasn’t knowledgeable about Christ at the time although I called myself a Christian, I just didn’t put the time or effort into even thinking what Christianity meant. Then my wife got pregnant and we were off to Lamaze classes. It was there that I saw a woman with a very small pin on her blouse. It was a pair of feet not much more than a half-inch in size and I was told that this is the size of the feet on a fetus at 10 weeks. I was simply stunned. My realization was that there was probably life at that time.

My sister-in-law was recently pregnant. At 8 weeks into her pregnancy the doctor let her hear the heartbeat. I am amazed again.

I also remember, as a child, hearing of awful things happening when women went to get illegal abortions. There were stories of botched procedures in dirty offices, loss of the woman’s ability to ever have children again, and loss of life of mother and child. Mostly these stories involved people of lesser means, those that couldn’t afford to go places well equipped to provide abortions while they were still outside of the law.

Later in life, when in my teens into my twenties, it was the 70’s; I knew two women that had abortions. One was prior to Roe v. Wade, the other after. Neither was carrying my child, but both were close friends that confided in me. The fear of the procedure in each case was extreme but was nothing compared to the feeling of loss afterwards. Both women were certain that they had done something horribly wrong and still, to this day I am sure, carry that burden with them. Imagine for a moment, all you parents that read this whether man or woman, how you would feel today if many years ago you had terminated a pregnancy. If every time you looked at your living and loving child you were reminded that there had been another one, one that had started the life cycle at the very least, one that would never be alive because of your personal decision. That feeling or worse is with these women from the moment of abortion and for each day thereafter.

My point is that abortion is as awful as awful gets. Yes, more so for the child than the mother, but simply awful all around. But, if illegal, those of lesser means face a much more dangerous situation than those that can afford expensive private clinics in other countries. If abortion is again made illegal in this country, those of means and need will still have safe places to go to and have this awful procedure but those that aren’t of means will do whatever is necessary to terminate that life. With that in mind I strongly say it is not up to the people of this country to decide what one woman does when faced with this life changing and yes, life stopping or possibility-of-life stopping situation.

I personally think that third-trimester abortions are murder and second-trimester abortions probably the same. I also think the “morning after pill” may be the only solution that I can support. The time in between, I go back to “I don’t know.” As for the “morning after pill” I don’t see it as a perfect solution because, again, I don’t know when life begins. I don’t find the answer in the Bible and I don’t think anything truly authoritative has been written on the matter.

Sadly I say, let each woman make her decision and live with the consequences. It is not up to the rest of us to judge her. The policies of the Republican Party seem to be to reverse Roe vs Wade by any means available, and the Democrats to defend it unfailingly. I say there needs to be new legislation, with some options remaining. Not the party line in either case. It is my perception of the Republican Party’s desire to outlaw all abortions that makes me think they go too far and want to control too much.

As Jesus says in John 8:7: “If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her.” And Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 4:5 “Therefore judge nothing before the appointed time; wait till the Lord comes. He will bring to light what is hidden in darkness and will expose the motives of men’s hearts. At that time each will receive his praise from God.” Or not, as the case may be. But it is not up to us to judge.

We should all pray for forgiveness. For ourselves and for others. None of us are perfect.

Adoption is a fine alternative but not in cases that would force a not-of-Faith rape victim to carry the rapist’s child to full term. Also, in cases where the mother’s life is at stake, abortion needs to be a legal and acceptable means to preserve the mother’s life. I applaud those that feel differently from me on this last item, for their personal decisions to trust God to do His will, but I do not believe we, as a country, should force that decision on others.

I believe a majority of Americans do oppose partial birth abortion. I also believe that a majority of Americans saw that the legislation passed and signed in 2004 was intended to go further than those Americans wished and I am thankful that our Supreme Court has the wisdom, even in their Republican biased seating, to see through the text of that legislation to the intent within the words. That legislation was entirely designed to appear much less inspiring of future litigation than it truly was.

One final comment here - if Roe vs Wade is to be overturned, I would hope for it to be put to a plurality vote across the nation, or in a state - but only with women voting. Men have no place in this discussion.

25 Comments:

Anonymous julie taylor said...

HI
I just looked at your site for the first time, and I like it.
Just letting you know, I agree w/ your views on abortion 100%.

Keep up the good work.

4/07/2005 6:34 PM  
Blogger Christian Democrat said...

Thank you for your comments, Julie. It's nice to know people are reading and thinking.

4/09/2005 5:28 PM  
Anonymous Joshua W. Hickman said...

We have a problem in this country. We have candidates and citizens who are Pro-Life, and then pass legislation that cuts the budget, and threatens to cut programs that take care of children. These programs include Public School, Social Security, and Health Care. What good is it to insist that a child be born only to grow up with out proper medical treatment, basic sustenance, and a basic education? Children without all three of these things are without Hope. If these children survive to adulthood, they will be incapable of supporting themselves, therefore create perpetual poverty. We will end up paying for them in our prisons. This is where I see the Democratic Party stepping up. If more candidates are Pro-Life, and take responsibility for that stance, they would become the person for a Christian to support. I encourage you to read God’s Politics by Jim Wallis. He outlines the problem for Christians voting in America today. Being Pro-Choice is not necessarily pro-abortion. Not all Democrats are Pro-Choice, and the majority are not pro-abortion. There are Pro-Life Democrats who want to go the distance from pre-birth to adulthood for a child. You will see more candidates that aren’t just Pro-Life, but Pro-A Life Worth Living.

5/10/2005 8:47 PM  
Blogger Christian Democrat said...

Thanks for the comment, Joshua. You make some good points if a bit absolute. I am glad that you capitalized “Hope” in “without Hope” because that tells me they are not without hope. A child born in poverty is not incapable of anything. There is always hope and achievement available through personal exception. Shall we simply condemn those that are born into such situations to a life without hope even in this draconian regime we call neo-con GOP rule? I hope not.

But your points are sincere and point well to the hypocrisy of the GOP. They want to ban abortion for all those that can’t afford the alternative means available to those of wealth with travel to other countries or high priced private and illegal practice here. They want to challenge all to achieve but withhold many of the tools of achievement - health, education, food - that this country can afford to give. And yes, poverty perpetuates poverty, but to write off a whole class of people is to ignore their own abilities. Please respect them for who they are and what they are capable of. And yes, may the government as well as private groups reach out to help them help themselves. If more of those “Compassionate Conservatives” would actually get off their butts and do the good they espouse, in the poorest communities, we would be far ahead, but many of them, and us, are Sunday Christians at best.

We can all do more outside of our government, and our country would be a better place for it. Our country would also be a better place if we funded the programs that are voted in, gave states money to spend on programs the Feds put in place, and if we taxed, yes taxed, the wealthiest a bit more, to the tune of repealing those permanent those tax cuts being a perfect place to start. Many rich folks will read this and say “There they go again” but they really need to ask themselves ”How much do I really need?”

You are correct, pro-life shouldn’t just be about the unborn child, it should be about the child born to the lesser circumstance, the least of us, and some above that. Pro-A-Life-Worth-Living is a beautiful concept. Lets work towards that.

Social programs that offer real opportunity for advancement including meals, before and after school care, schools funded for their individual needs rather than some governmental mandate of similarity, and increased parental involvement are key to limiting the need for abortions. But sadly I will say it again – the need won’t go away entirely, and it isn’t up to us to judge what another does.

5/11/2005 7:20 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Moderate Democrat

I made a comment to a small group of Democratic women that the Democratic Party will never win the national elective offices until the abortion issue is off of the table. They became irate and said that if the Democratic party did not support abortion-they would no longer be Democrats.

I feel sad that that feeling may be shared by some Democrats. But the truth of the matter is that every four years the Republican faithful drag that old bone out to chew on it again and affect the election of our president. The Republicans do not want this issue to go away. On the contrary, it wins untold votes for them in every election.

For instance in the state of Ohio, Amish leaders told their constituents to go to the polls to vote this one issue. Amish folks do not normally vote in such great numbers as in 2004.

I truly believe that the one issue of abortion will effectively keep Democrats out of the white house for years.

I do not personally approve of abortion; but I also do not believe in joblessness, homelessness, poverity or poor education. None of these issues seem to be of importance to Repubicans. "Just get them born alive and then turn your back on them" seems to be the sentiment of the government these days.

I don't presume to have all the answers but I also have no vision for the Democrats being in any power positions any time soon.

5/23/2005 10:32 PM  
Blogger Christian Democrat said...

For those interested: some comments appropriate to this thread start in the second comment posted in the "Gimme, Gimme, Gimme" article. A good read.

5/25/2005 3:30 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think most down in the trenches Christians look at this stuff and laugh. "we have people in this country who have nothing to eat, nowhere to live, and no healthcare whatsoever" And there are millions upon millions of these people.

So many hypocrites. the pro-life people still want abortion for incest and rape. And then most of them are pro death penalty. Most of them don't give a care about the po' folks.

It's so sad its laughable.

6/01/2005 9:37 PM  
Blogger Christian Democrat said...

Let us not laugh about these issues. I really like a comment that came in a couple of weeks ago:

Let's be pro-a-life-worth-living.

The line of "against abortion but for a woman's choice" rings true to me. The idea of killing people that have done heinous crimes also rings true. Mans' law is one thing, God's another. The only time that will be untrue is on Judgement Day.

Having had a discussion with a right-wing Christian couple over the weekend I have come to realize that they simply think differently, perhaps less, about how to solve problems of poverty and greed. They think that both are needed to some degree, that not all poverty can be ended, that greed drives man to create greater things.

Poverty probably cannot be ended, but it can be made a whole lot easier on those that are there. Greed is a driving force, but one that government should harness, control and punish when necessary; the free market will reward when innovation truly exists.

Currently greed is a driving force in our government which is more pro-business than pro-people based in its actions. Currently they have defied the laws of physics with their trickle-up policies.

Let's turn this around, together, please.

Peace.

6/02/2005 8:55 AM  
Anonymous Kat said...

I am a Pro-Life Democrat. It's good to see others like me. I find that there are a lot of Democrats who ignore the Pro-Lifers within their own party.

Abortion as a method of birth control is murder. Excusing it by saying that the child will grow up poor is like saying it's o.k. to kill the poor because they'd be happier dead. That's insane. I cringe when I hear that logic.

Abortion should only be o.k. when the mother would die if the pregnancy wasn't terminated, like when the embryo is growing outside the uterus.

As far as abortion for rape victims go, I am not sure. That baby is not a criminal, but I can't imagine the burden being pregnant would put on the mother. Perhaps the morning after pill, which may already be part of rape kits, is the best solution in these cases, when the victim gets help in time to take it.

I am not a Christian, I avoid organized religion, but I am a spiritual person who values life.

6/08/2005 10:38 AM  
Blogger interfaithpope said...

This is such a complex issue for all sides. Most Democrats I know are solidly "pro-choice" while being uncomfortable with or against abortion itself. It seems that America has become more interested in labels and sound-bytes than in a real message. I loved what Senator Kerry said about the abortion issue in the presidential debates. He said that he supports a woman's right to choose for herself but because he is against abortion, he and his wife conduct speaking engagements to educate and advocate against having abortions. What truly floors me is how the current administration (is it the Surgeon General?) is trying to advocate an abstinence only sex-education policy where birth control isn't even discussed. They don't want abortions to happen but they also don't want to face the reality that people, those who believe it's a sin as well as those who don't, are having sex and accidentally getting pregnant. So, I would think it was logical (of course, nobody's has been caught accusing this administration of being logical) that they would be the main supporters of birth control methods in an effort to eliminate a potential abortion.

On another note, thank you Christian Democrat for pointing out that it's not as though women who have abortions are throwing parties to celebrate afterward. I think it's a disgusting misconception that women who have abortions don't care or have no remorse for their actions. On the contrary, I think these women are emotionally tortured for the rest of their lives. I think a great deal of thought and soul searching goes into that kind of decision. I would be curious to see if there is such a thing as a statistic about women who have multiple abortions as a method of birth control. I have a feeling that it's amazingly low if there is one. I think that conservatives want people to think that these women get drunk, get laid, and have abortions every weekend. I seriously doubt that resembles reality but, again, so far no-one in this administration seems to be bothered by reality. :)

I think that as a solution to the abortion issue we should keep first trimester abortion available and throw out the red carpet for the morning after pill and all other forms of contraception. We should also heavily increase our sex education funding and teach both abstinence AND contraception. I think that most neo-cons out there want to keep their heads in the sand and pretend that the majority of people will abstain from sex once they've learned about it. I'm sorry, but, regardless of your beliefs, most people's sex drive is much MUCH stronger than their will power. Having been raised in a staunchly Christian household, I was prevented from attending sex education classes until I was a junior in high school. If I had been an average teenager I could have been pregnant by the time I ever learned about contraception. I know it's hard for parents to talk about sex with their kids, let alone admit to the possibility of their 14 year old being sexually active, but it's something that parents have to face someday. Your kids aren't always going to do what you think they should or what you think is right, so give them a way to be safe even if they deviate from your ideas.

My sister-in-law is a neo-con pro-lifer who admitted that if her daughter became pregnant at age 13 (yes, it happens more than any of us like to think) she would fly her daughter out of the country and pay for an abortion. This is the kind of hypocrisy that is out there in the conservative community. Anti-pro-choice legislation hurts the people in our society who are most vulnerable because of their lack of education or money. So my sister-in-law might be able to afford to fly her daughter out of the country to have an illegal abortion but what about the millions of people who can't? I don't like abortion. I don't think I could choose that even if I had been raped. But, I'm not going to pretend that I know what's best for someone else. This is such a personal choice that the government should just get out of it all together. But no, they want us to go back to the era of back-alley abortion doctors where the woman ends up permanently damaged or dead. Or, as has happened before, because they couldn't get access to a professional abortion, young women have stuck sharp objects into their uteruses in an attempt to self abort their fetus. As disgusting as the idea of a partial-birth-abortion is, I think the visual of a teenager with a coathanger sticking out of her vagina, internally and externally bleeding to death, is just as gruesome. Let's have some compassionate convervatism from the Bush administration for that one!


What people are failing to understand here is that by keeping abortion legal we aren't convincing people that it's right or okay. We are simply providing a safe place for people who are going to seek it out anyway. As an analogy, you may be against partaking of alcohol but, as we learned in the 1920's, by outlawing it you didn't stop people from partaking in alcohol. What we ended up with was a bunch of back-woods bootleggers whose concoctions were causing people to go blind. So the lesson I feel we are supposed to have learned is that if you want something to be controlled and safe it must be legal.

6/08/2005 2:39 PM  
Anonymous Brooke said...

I too don't want to see us go back to the "back alley" days.I too believe men have NO say whatsoever on this topic. The responsible thing to do is to keep it legal for the WOMEN that CHOOSE that decision. In my case, I have had an abortion. I do have times when I feel bad about my CHOICE. I now have two beautiful children and had I not made that CHOICE they would not be here. They are two thoughtful, caring, smart and Christian children. I am a Christian woman and a Democrat. And it is very rare in my area that those two words go hand in hand. But now I feel after reading other thoughts I can wear that label with a renewed confidence. I strongly beleive that it is easy to say " I support abortion but I would NEVER have one". Excuse me for saying but those comments are a slap in the face to all women that have had to make the CHOICE. I feel that it is a passive aggressive way of making your statement more acceptable. You will NEVER know what will happen in your life. NEVER.

11/10/2005 7:21 AM  
Blogger Cornelius said...

Enjoyed the post and comments. I think that defining the beginning of life is always going to be subjective. For the Christian the story of Christmas must have something to say. God entered the world in the conception of Jesus. That settles the issue theologically for me but not practically. I think there has to be workable compromise or else the issue will never be resolved. Working class folks who love children for many reasons, one being because we don't have money. (The African proverb says it all..."The rich get richer and the poor get children.") I think there is another African proverb that Hillary made popular..."It takes a village." Individuals cannot exist without community. Too many arguments for the pro choice position sound like libertarian economic arguments. A socialist would have to be pro-life if she were to be consistent. If the Democrats would just lighten up about the pro-choice issue we would not have any more close elections. Working class people are looking for a way to vote both their pocket books and their consciences. A pragmatic pro-life position...allow abortion in the first trimester, states decide in the second and never in the third unless the biological life of the mother is clearly threatened by continuing the preganancy...comprehensive abstinence encouraging sex education.... simplified adoption laws and money to encourage it for both biological mother and adopting parent(s). Such a platform would make a few libertarian Democrats made enough to vote Republican but the avalanche of working class people who would come our way on election day would be well worth it. I wish that Dennis Kucinich had stuck to his pro-life position... he was the real progressive in the last election and his change of mind did nothing to persuade the Dean folks they were in the wrong boat. What if he had stuck with it and focus on changing voter registrations...I think he could have beat Bush as the progressive pro life Democrat but the Party would never let him or any other such candidate get the nomination. Maybe next time.

12/15/2005 7:52 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It's interesting to see that you start this article with "Abortion is wrong" and by the end you have reversed your stand. The message seems mixed. The Bible is very clear.
"Thou Shalt NOT Kill."
"If I unnderstand what's being said here it's that as Christians we shouldn't take a stand. Just let everyone decide for themselves and don't get involved. After all everyone is personally responsible for their actions. If we allow abortion to continue as Christians or non-Christians we will be held accountable.
"By their actions you shall know them"
So if we do nothing that's how we'll be known. Afraid to take a stand. Afraid to call sin wrong.

9/07/2006 8:04 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I am a christian, who's goal is to love like Jesus did and does! I fall short, but continue moving forward in that direction. I like finding christians that represent God, not a political party. The last sentence of this article is disturbing to me. To say that a father has no say in the life of his child is very sad to me. I have a cousin that lost his child through abortion, and he was devastated. Put yourself in that position...Would you still say that the man should have no say? Thanks for your ideas!

1/20/2008 9:32 AM  
Blogger Christian Democrat said...

I'll admit to some additional thinking since this piece was originally written as the movement for fathers' rights has gotten some press.

I can see in some cases the male parent having equal say in the decision to terminate a pregnancy. In a marriage, certainly, and in cases where an unwed couple is actively attempting to get pregnant, yes. But where else? I am uncertain.

To the other end of the spectrum, a one night stand that begins a pregnancy, probably shouldn't allow for the male to have the same rights. If there was no intent to become pregnant then how can the man force the issue for the woman? If there isn't commitment between the partners then how can either of them claim commitment to the responsibilities of parenting?

It is this range of situations that leaves me on the side of privacy and legalized abortion. Man's law is too confining, with judicial interpretation sometimes taking one side, then later the other, seen as wrong by some in either case.

My support goes to realistic sex education based in the home and church or other community group (Girl Scouts & Boy Scouts come to mind) and in the public forum, like schools for instance. The school education should be encouraged, not mandatory. But it should be available. Speaking from my experience as a kid and as a leader of youth in a notably affluent white-bread Christian-strong suburb where many of these fine kids drink underage, do drugs that are easier to get than alcohol, watch "Desperate Housewives," "The OC" and other explicit television, and yes, experiment with sex in many forms, I'll say that those parents who think their kids need it least may be in some serious denial of the power of sin.

Each of us has engraved on our hearts the difference between right and wrong and we know when we do them. Our socialization/education on birth control and the consequences of unprotected sex brings the possibility of rational thinking and change of mind, but the truth is known to each of us.

I am in favor of fewer abortions and would vastly prefer that there be none. But it isn't up to me to say what another couple, or an unwed woman, does with the life of her unborn child.

In most cases I still believe it is the woman's right to privacy, of her pregnancy as well as the termination thereof, that has precedence in these matters.

The current press for fathers' rights must be coming from the anti-abortion movement as their latest attempt to sway opinion. It's a pretty good concept but I don't think it will cause the change of tide they are hoping for, in fact, my idea may play into their desires all the more:

If only women were to vote on the abortion issue do you think it would sway towards continued legalized abortion or against it?

1/22/2008 7:51 AM  
Blogger Bookworm aka me said...

Hi,

Found your blog tonight. Oh how I've needed something like this! Sigh...good old fashioned faith and common sense, yay!

Having said that, I agree with 99.8% of what you say...except the father's rights issue. It takes two to conceive, and the result of that action is biologically connected to both of the people involved, whether they intend to conceive or not.

Assuming that the woman involved is of sound mind and body, (that is, she is mentally capable of understanding the consequences of sex -- and that includes that she is not a child of 13 or younger or so) then yes while it is "her body" it was also her body when she laid down and said "lets have sex". That being the case, every so often, the human body will react as it was intended and pregnancy happens.

People have unplanned children in this country all the time married and unmarried. And "planning" can't be the sole factor. If a man has sex and his partner becomes pregnant, he is that child's biological father. If she were to give said child up for adoption, he has a say in that matter. In abortion it should be different? I can't agree.

As long as there is a parent willing and able to BE a parent, they should be granted that right. As a woman, I can't approve of holding a man's child hostage, simply because the design of my body makes it possible

4/10/2008 6:52 PM  
Blogger Christian Democrat said...

Interesting viewpoint, honorable particularly coming from a woman giving up rights I espouse. ;>)

For me it comes down to intent. If the couple is having sex with the intent of making baby that's one thing. But when "accidents" occur, the man who had not previously said "Let's make a family" has no right to say he wants one now.

4/12/2008 7:48 AM  
Blogger Ryan S. said...

Life begins at conception!

5/30/2008 1:46 PM  
Blogger Christian Democrat said...

Ryan S -

By my interpretation, God's intent for a life begins before that.

Christian Democrat

6/01/2008 6:55 PM  
Blogger Brother in Christ said...

Well the thought of letting people make up their own mind to sin, and they do it every day, is nice. But we do have laws to prohibit sin.

I feel as a christian I should do everything possible to keep people from sin. Not to place stumbling blocks in front of my brothers and sisters.

I like wine and don't believe a glass will send you to hell. But I wont have one and someone stumble because of my drinking. Not even in my own house alone.

If it's ok with the world doesn't make it ok with God.If you say it's ok to rape in certian cases more people would do it.

How can you support this if you know it's taking a life God has put in the earth to be a gift.You believe God knows about our life before conception so if you abort it you are going against God's will.

God dosen't have "accidents" and you know He is the creator of life not us.

Psa 127:3 Children are a reward

You know that your a father. The democratic Canidate said that having a child is a punishment. That's so far from what God says.

And out of the abundance of heart the mouth speaks.

And don't fool yourself you are supporting it voting for this party. That makes you responsable for every child killed.
Judas didn't kill Jesus but he was responsable for bringing it about.
He went to hell. I don't want any one to go to hell and have no say in it. But the devil is trickie. We must repent of our sins.

9/14/2008 5:36 PM  
Blogger Christian Democrat said...

Brother in Christ -

Your screen name is that which we in our church address each other regularly. It brings familiarity and responsibility. You bring up many points and I'll try to address them here.

Laws against sin: The bulk of our constitution and laws are for the protection of freedom and the rights of the individual. Often sin goes against freedom and the rights of the individual, the other individual (or victim), so those laws are to protect man against other man who happens to be sinning.

Faith cannot be legislated, it must be shared.

Stumbling Blocks: You are kind to be aware that we can be stumbling blocks for those around us, and that it should be avoided. But again, laws don't keep people from sinning, they just punish them when they get caught in the here-and-now.

This world, during mans' reign, does have different rules for the world than that which we accept, responsibly, from God as faithful people. Most of mans' law also follows God's law, but where God's law is the higher standard it is only the faithful that must be held to it. We impose that upon ourselves out of thanks to God.

Your concept that rape, if not unlawful would increase, is faulty in that the very reason rape is unlawful is that the majority of people, regardless of faith, find it horrid and worthy of punishment. This is unto the law of the Gentiles as spoken by the apostle Paul, with the knowledge of right and wrong written on their hearts.

Your next few paragraphs thru Psalm 127, deal with abortion and I think I made it clear how much I personally abhor abortion in my initial posting at the top. I simply do not want to force that belief on others that don't share it, nor do I want to push those that are having abortions into dangerous situations. And yes, I hear your scream that the baby is in one heck of a dangerous situation, too.

God is all knowing. Omniscient. Out of time. Knew each of us from creation and knows that some of us won't make it out of the womb for many reasons, some man(and I will say sin)-caused. For what reasons is unknown to us, but God lets this happen. It's horrid but worse when illegal. Shall we, in pursuit of a higher land, sink to the muck of making misery for the sinner here and now?

With 1.2 million abortions in America in 2005 the numbers are crisis proportions, I grant you. The way to reduce abortions is to reduce pregnancies in the first place and that includes sex education (including abstinence as the most certain way to avoid pregnancy and STDs) and condom availability at pre-eighteen age levels. I know this goes against your faith, but again ask you to see that you and your family, your church and faithful, can hold yourselves to higher standards. Teach abstinence through faith and an understanding that becomes wisdom if that works for you. But you are then asking your child to be perfect. And we aren't. So perhaps a chat about condoms, if sinning in such a manner as one might be required, is in order.

Do you have children? I've got two daughters in college.

I do not know of any Democratic candidate saying having a child is punishment.

As for Judas, I've been thinking of him lately, too. By my understanding of prophecy in scripture there HAD to be someone like Judas for the prophecy to be true. Was Judas chosen to do an evil deed by God or was he simply a greedy man that happened along at the right place and right time only to do the wrong thing? I'm no fan of Judas, certainly, but I have no hate for him.

May God's peace be with us all.

9/15/2008 7:59 AM  
Blogger Amber said...

i have to say that it's very refreshing to find someone who views religion and politics in a similar way. i've recently been verbally beaten by my in-laws who are right wing fundamentalist christians who feel that the word democrat is synonymous with "anti-christ" when it comes to politics. at their church last sunday the pastor took Obama's views out of context and used that as ammunition against him in the abortion debate. it seems that they can't seperate the concepts of anti-abortion and pro-choice and that those two views can be shared in one mind. i think abortion is horrible but who am i to choose the course of your life for you. the irony to me is that every one of them is pro capital punishment. is there a sliding scale for who should and shouldn't die....and when did we get the power to choose that? these are issues that i face on a daily basis i my family.....(you have to understand that i'm dealing with people who think that obama is a muslim, and sarah palin is the best thing since sliced bread). i'm glad i found your site so that i don't have to doubt my own faith and beliefs, and know that there are others just like me!

thanks
amber

9/30/2008 6:38 AM  
Anonymous Joshua W Hickman said...

I'm the Guy that was first to reply to the author of this blog, and I forgot all about it till now. Over the last few years I solidified my own stances on issues. I'm amazed that what I wrote in 2005 is still what I believe today. I have respect for Pro-Choice Democrats and I'm pleased with the election of Barack Obama for several reasons.

However, this is one issue that must not become the Litmus test for the Democratic Party we must prove to the Republican party that we champion diversity on more than racial, religious, cultural, and demographic lines. We must support the freedom of speech within our own party and encourage, accept, or tolerate those who don't agree with the majority of the party on issues such as abortion.

I'm most certainly a Christian, a Democrat, and Pro-Life.

I encourage you to consider the Civil Rights of the Unborn. We must balance our stance in the light of the Social Justice of the Poor. "Christian Democrat" above speaks of this issue when points out that unilateral change of the law would only punish the poor while the rich would find ways around it. However, our current law could be interpreted in such a way as to provide a temporary compromise.

There are many ways of arguing for the Pro-Life stance with out using Christian Overtones. Regardless, I feel this way because of my faith.

11/20/2008 8:16 PM  
Anonymous Amy in Indiana said...

This was always the "litmus" test thrown at me by fellow Christians. Aren't you pro-life? I heard it a million times. Of course I am. It's a slippery slope in a way though. I have several points of view as a Christian, a scientist, and as a woman. Most ultra conservatives will say life begins at conception. They deem a one-day old embryo the moral equivalent as a 6 year old child. I'm not dissagreeing here. However, why do the many of the same people think it's okay to do fertility treatments and freeze embryo's (some of which are never used and eventually die) but yet it's not okay to freeze a 6 year old (if they're the moral equivalent in their eyes). Also, as far as Roe vs. Wade, I have mixed emotions. If the ultra conservatives got what they wanted, then essentially all of our birth control would be stripped from us since contraceptives act to prevent ovulation AND prevent the fertilized egg from implanting in the uterus. Thus further invading personal freedoms more. Anyway, as a scientist I have a lot of deep thoughts on this and am always open to discussion on this.

2/20/2009 12:42 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The Morning After Pill works in such a way that it will not destroy an already fertilized egg, but it simply kills sperm that has not yet reached the egg. So I, as a Christian, believe it is perfectly acceptable because no union has taken place to form an embryo and no conception has happened yet.

I really think your site is helpful, Christian Democrat. I have not found many young, politically motivated, strong christians who have similar beliefs to me, but I'm definitely searching for more viewpoints anywhere I can find them because I struggle to find truth in a majority of aspects.

5/03/2009 1:16 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home