Great Stuff Found on the Web — The Pro-Life Mask

Found on Pastor Fiene’s The High Midlife:

 

Todd Akin recently accomplished something that I had always considered impossible.  With his odd attempt to explain that abortion is not morally acceptable even if a woman has been raped, Rep. Akin convinced me that abortion rights advocates may have been right all along.

Not that they have been right that abortion should be legal.  The Word of God teaches us that, from the very moment of conception, we are fully human, fully human sinners in need of Christ’s forgiveness and fully clothed in the dignity that God commands must be given to all the descendants of Adam and Eve.  And this Biblical teaching that life begins at conception is scientifically echoed in the fact that, at the moment of conception, you find unique human DNA that is alive, cells that are growing, dividing, developing into tissue and organs and systems.  If this “glob of cells” were just a part of the mother’s body, she would certainly be as free to dispose of it as if it were her appendix.  But it is not her body.  It is the body of another human being.  It is a life which cannot justifiably be taken.  And to take that life is a murderous act.

So they have not been right in defending abortion.  Rather, abortion rights advocates have been right in their contention that pro-life advocates simply want to control women.  Todd Akin, or rather the response from many pro-life politicians and personalities to his comments, convinced me of this.

Mitt Romney’s campaign, for example, made sure to reassert that the GOP nominee does not oppose abortion in the cases of rape or incest.  The media also was quick to point out how out of touch with mainstream America Akin’s opposition to abortion in cases of rape is, citing that only 17% of Americans believe that abortion should be outlawed in all circumstances, a much lower figure than the fifty-ish percent of people who identify themselves as somewhere on the pro-life spectrum.

Obviously rape is a deplorable act, a dehumanizing crime that continues striking with psychological violence long after the physical violence has concluded.  And, at the risk of disagreeing with Jacob the Patriarch, I believe that the Shechemites got what they deserved when Simeon and Levi put them to the sword in defense of their sister. But, in spite of all that, what are Gov. Romney and other pro-life voices trying to say when they reaffirm that they don’t oppose abortion in cases of rape?

Surely they’re not saying life begins at conception except when a woman is raped, in which case life only begins if a raped woman wants that life to have begun.  Such a position would be as scientifically indefensible as Rep. Akin’s belief that a woman’s ovaries have a built in Star Wars Missile Defense Shield in the event of rape.  Rather, what pro-life voices are saying when they affirm the rape exception is this woman should get a pass on having to carry this child to term because getting pregnant wasn’t her fault.

And, in saying that, what are they also saying?  But all those other women chose to sleep with their husbands, their boyfriends, their drunken hookup partners, and they should have to take responsibility for their actions.  They agreed to participate in marital relations or fornication or adultery, so they should have to face the consequences of the decisions they made willingly.

So these voices don’t oppose abortion out of a genuine respect for unborn life.  They don’t believe that this living, growing, developing thing within a mother’s womb deserves the same dignity and protection that you and I deserve, regardless of how conception occurred.  No, instead, these voices simply want women to act like grownups, to be responsible enough to pay the piper when their actions come back to bite them in the uterus.

And I’m afraid this mindset is exactly what abortion rights voices have been condemning.  You don’t have the right to tell a woman what to do with her body, before sex or after.  This has been the pro-choice mantra for quite some time.  And the more that pro-life voices make exceptions for rape and incest, the more they reveal that their pro-life convictions are not governed by a desire to protect unborn children, but by a desire to judge sexually active parents.  The more that pro-life voices give their consent to the murder of unborn children conceived in rape, the more they reveal that the only thing distinguishing them from a president who doesn’t want his daughters punished with a baby is that they’re fine with that form of punishment, as long as the girl deserves it.

But we don’t oppose abortion because women should have to lie in the beds they’ve fornicated in.  We don’t oppose abortion out of judgment.  We oppose it out of mercy, out of the desire to defend the weakest among us, to protect those who have no strength or power or influence.  We oppose abortion because a human’s life begins at conception, and because, from that very moment, he deserves the same rights that you and I have, both the right to live in safety as a citizen of this nation, and the right to hear the saving Word of God that gives peace to those who were at war with God from the moment egg and sperm first combined.

So please pray.  Pray that Democrats and Republicans, conservatives and liberals may see that we have no greater treasure than the lives of those who haven’t even made a bump in their mother’s bellies yet and that we have no greater duty than to defend their existence.  Pray that God may soon provide doctors a way of taking children out of the wombs of mothers who would otherwise have them aborted and into the wombs of mothers who will cherish and love them and weep tears of joy on the days they are born.  And pray that those who have picketed outside of abortion clinics and those who have utilized the services inside may both turn from their sins and trust in the saving blood of Jesus Christ that never runs dry.

About Norm Fisher

Norm was raised in the UCC in Connecticut, and like many fell away from the church after high school. With this background he saw it primarily as a service organization. On the miracle of his first child he came back to the church. On moving to Texas a few years later he found a home in Lutheranism when he was invited to a confessional church a half-hour away by our new neighbors.

He is one of those people who found a like mind in computers while in Middle School and has been programming ever since. He's responsible for many websites, including the Book of Concord, LCMSsermons.com, and several other sites.

He has served the church in various positions, including financial secretary, sunday school teacher, elder, PTF board member, and choir member.

More of his work can be found at KNFA.net.

Comments

Great Stuff Found on the Web — The Pro-Life Mask — 22 Comments

  1. Some have referred to Todd Akin’s recent gaffe as the “Akin fiasco.” In fact, it is a “Romney fiasco” or a “RINO fiasco” or a “faux-conservative fiasco,” in that these individuals have become part of the pro-murder-by-abortion treachery of Barack, his Demonicrat thugs, and fifth-column media skanks.

    George Neumayr explains it well in these excerpts from his article, “Cowed by Political Correctness“:

    Barack Obama hired as one of his top Department of Education officials a gay-rights activist named Kevin Jennings, who once glibly counseled a “15-year-old” student thought to have been statutorily raped by an older man: “I hope you knew to use a condom.”

    Don’t expect Obama to receive any questions from the press about these views of his first “Safe Schools Czar.” No, outrage in this culture is restricted to those deemed unenlightened in the nuances of avant-garde morality. According to its porous scorecard, Christianity is bad for women while Islam is good for them. Pro-life countries receive scoldings from Hillary Clinton, while the one-child policy of China, which kills female infants, isn’t “second-guessed” by this administration, as Joe Biden put it on a visit.

    Beneath all the hysterical extrapolations from his [Akin’s] remark, which grew wilder and wilder as the days passed, lay that essential demand: approve of killing unborn children conceived under circumstances of rape or be deemed “anti-woman.”

    This culture of hectoring explains why Mitt Romney rushed to the cameras upon hearing Akin’s remark to pronounce abortion in those cases “appropriate.” In a rotten culture, proof of one’s “civilized” bona fides comes from such shameless pandering.

    An authentically conservative party would find Romney’s unprincipled position far more chilling than Akin’s gaffe. If unborn children gain or lose their right to life depending upon the circumstances of their conception, then the party has already conceded that that right doesn’t exist.

    [Emphasis added]

  2. @Carl Vehse #1
    Beneath all the hysterical extrapolations from his [Akin’s] remark, which grew wilder and wilder as the days passed, lay that essential demand: approve of killing unborn children conceived under circumstances of rape or be deemed “anti-woman.”

    Yes, it occurred to me the other day that once again the liberals are framing this as an issue of women’s rights, not the child’s right to live. (Of course, they fail to mention that they are demanding specifically a woman’s right to kill her children.)

  3. Pastor Ted Crandall :
    Yes, it occurred to me the other day that once again the liberals are framing this as an issue of women’s rights, not the child’s right to live. (Of course, they fail to mention that they are demanding specifically a woman’s right to kill her children.)

    One reason why the liberals frame it as an issue of a woman’s right is because they do not believe they are dealing with a human person in utero up to a certain number of weeks after fertilization. So, they argue that the “tissue” attached to the mother’s uterus has no rights (no more than one of her fingernails has rights). “Pro-abortionists” have no sense of when a human person is formed in the uterus, apart from what the state tells them. Psalm 139:13 makes no sense to them, “For you formed my inward parts; you knitted me together in my mother’s womb.”

  4. Jim people like Obama support abortion at all times including after birth abortions for those that survive the attempted murder.

  5. I thought the issue was federal funding of rape.
    The Ryan and Akin-sponsored bill would not give federal funds for marital rape, date rape, inebriated rape, etc.
    Only for forcible rape by a stranger.
    Much rape could be averted if fathers protected their daughters.

  6. @Rose #5
    Rose, why would you kill the child for any rape perpetrated by his or her father?

    @Jim Pierce #3
    I’m not so sure they are still debating whether “it” is a person. It is science that teaches us that the new, unique individual begins when the two unique strands from the parents recombine. It looks to me like they are only debating when that new individual has any rights — like the right to live.

    “Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me.”
    (Psalm 51:5)

  7. Michael :
    Jim people like Obama support abortion at all times including after birth abortions for those that survive the attempted murder.

    You are right. If they could rescind all laws limiting when abortions can be performed they would do it. Obama has opposed both partial birth abortion legislation and legislation restricting late term abortions.

    @Pastor Ted Crandall #6

    Good point! Some of the more philosophical liberals I have discussions with will reject any notion that a fetus in utero is a person (they argue around being able to viably live outside the womb). But, that is probably not a debating point for most who support abortion, as you point out. Excellent scripture, too! Thank you.

  8. >> … what are Gov. Romney and other pro-life voices trying to say when they reaffirm that they don’t oppose abortion in cases of rape?

    Paris vaut bien une messe (“Paris is well worth a Mass”)

  9. @Jim Pierce #7
    Excellent scripture, too! Thank you. (Psalm 51:5)

    Unfortunately, many otherwise good translations introduce an ambiguity not in the original about who exactly was sinful at the conception, the mother or her child. The Word of God is clear that the new person is sinful at conception.

    Science agrees that he or she is a new, unique individual at conception and even agrees that the child has a sinful nature, calling the Old Adam the instinct of self-preservation.

  10. The issue of abortion in cases of rape would be a non-issue if it were not for the tremendous amount of “rapes” resulting in pregnancies. The estimates are in the 30,000s per year in the U.S. This number is so high because it includes so-called statutory rape, which accounts for the overwhelming majority of such pregnancies. The evil of pro-abortion advocates is manifest in the glaring contradiction involved in their advocacy for abortion on demand for teens without parental consent (clearly assuming that the teen is capable of making the decision of whether or not to kill her unborn child), while at the same time maintaining that a teen who becomes pregnant after intercourse with a man older than she is should be considered raped, because the teen is not capable of making the decision of whether or not she should have intercourse. So a teen is perfectly capable of making the decision to kill a human life without parental guidance, but unable to make the decision to refrain from sex. Of course, the only logic involved here is the hodgepodge of emotional conclusions streaming from the premise that God does not exist and we are not accountable for our actions.

  11. @Pastor Ted Crandall #6
    Pastor Ted,
    I wasn’t referring to incest.
    Fathers can protect their daughters by discouraging promiscuity in dress and activities.
    And by spending time with their daughters, talking to them about high standards of behavior and giving them the attention their daughters need.

  12. @Rose #12
    “I wasn’t referring to incest.”

    Neither was I. When I asked why anyone would kill the child for any rape perpetrated by his or her father, I was referring to the father of the unborn child, not the rape victim. (I’m still not being especially clear, since the unborn child is also a victim of the rape — and made even more so when aborted.)

    Many people don’t realize that real victims of rape with pregnancy resulting have an awful trauma to survive that is made even worse for them when they also have to deal with the trauma of having chosen to end the life of their own child. (Even Planned Parenthood counsels it’s customers for “routine” abortions to expect some psychological trauma.) Interviews with real victims of rape reveal that recovery is not as hard to achieve when they don’t complicate their recovery with “post abortion stress disorder.”

    Have you seen the interview with Jaycee Lee Dugard? Her babies helped her survive years of rape. Would she be as centered today, if she was also grieving the loss of her children? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kidnapping_of_Jaycee_Lee_Dugard

  13. How would they administer a rape exception?

    Short answer: you can’t.

    Rather than get into a discussion of the long answer, politicians choose to just say that a rape exception is fine.

    When the abortions from forcible rape are <1%, it is just expedient to concede that tiny fraction and discuss the millions and millions which are killed as just a birth control measure.

    I totally disagree that it is about controlling women.

    Abortion restrictions aren't placed on women, they are placed on doctors. The doctor is the focus of the enforcement efforts. Women on the other hand, experience miscarriages, and it would be just plain stupid to try to legislate policies that would identify women as the point of enforcement. Prohibitions and regulations are written such that the doctor's provision of service is point at which the policies are enforced.

    Abortion is the leading cause of death. More people die from abortion than from any other single cause.

  14. @Jim Pierce #3
    They make an exception when a pregnant woman is killed. The killer can be charged with two murders. That takes us back to Pastor Crandall’s comments. Their arguments are horribly circular. This happened recently here a drunk driver killed a pregnant woman and was charged with two murders.

  15. @Rose #12
    Fathers can protect their daughters… [Quite right.]

    Fathers can protect their daughters by being the kind of men they would like their daughters to marry.

    Fathers can protect their neighbors’ daughters by teaching their sons that “being a man” doesn’t mean “scoring” with women.
    [If it did, a high schooler in Houston a few years back, reputed to have a dozen kids by nearly as many girls, would be “Man of the Year”!]

    Having a post confirmation “men and boys” lunch at Hooters isn’t the way, either!

  16. Question: Are there any medical docs or physiologists out there who can tell me if Todd Akin was right or wrong in his assertion that there is an inborn defense in a woman’s body when she is raped?

  17. @Redeemed #17: “…tell me if Todd Akin was right or wrong in his assertion that there is an inborn defense in a woman’s body when she is raped?”

    Todd Akin probably got the assertion he expressed on pregnancy from rape based on one or more of the following articles:

    “The Indications for Induced Abortion: A Physician’s Perspective,” by Dr. Fred Mecklenburg in Abortion and Social Justice, an anthology compiled by Dr. Thomas W. Hilger in 1972. Dr. Mecklenburg was the former chairman of obstetrics at Inova Women’s Hospital in Falls Church, Va.

    A 1979 book, Handbook on Abortion, by Dr. John C. “Jack” Willke, founder of the National Right to Life Committee.

    Willke also wrote an article, “Rape Pregnancies are rare,” in the Christian Life Resources, April 1999.

    According to the last reference by Dr. Willke:

    “Every woman is aware that stress and emotional factors can alter her menstrual cycle. To get and stay pregnant a woman’s body must produce a very sophisticated mix of hormones. Hormone production is controlled by a part of the brain that is easily influenced by emotions. There’s no greater emotional trauma that can be experienced by a woman than an assault rape. This can radically upset her possibility of ovulation, fertilization, implantation and even nurturing of a pregnancy.”

  18. @Andrew #15
    “a drunk driver killed a pregnant woman and was charged with two murders”

    Similarly inconsistent, in our local hospital, when a baby is born addicted to illegal drugs, the police are called and the mother is charged with child abuse.

    In both your example and mine, it’s a crime to abuse or kill the unborn child — unless the mother has an abortionist do it for her.

    Another inconsistency is the law that usurps a parent’s right and responsibility when a minor is granted an abortion without the parents’ consent — even against their objections. She’s assumed to be mature enough to make such a monumental decision alone, yet the same minor is not mature enough to consent to the sex that got her pregnant?

    Obviously, the pro-abortion crowd have an agenda and don’t let the facts get in their way.

  19. @Jim Pierce #3
    “Psalm 139:13 makes no sense to them, “For you formed my inward parts; you knitted me together in my mother’s womb.” I agree…but it may begin to make sense in our time because of the sonagram/ultrasound and what it shows. Once the gender is determined, parents will name the child and some even plan the baptism. One does not name fetal tissue or a baptism of the same, but a child. A sonagram shows what the inspired psalmist knew centuries long ago, now like yesterday.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gwFIEprF_9Y&feature=player_embedded

  20. @Pr. Mark Schroeder #20
    A sonagram shows what the inspired psalmist knew centuries long ago, now like yesterday.

    Yes, it does.
    So, the response of the pro-abortion crowd is that it’s abuse of the woman to expect her to know what she is doing, and who she’s doing it to! They prefer to perpetuate the myth that “it’s just a mass of undifferentiated tissue”.
    [One wonders when they think they came together, since their mothers gave birth to what passes for a human being.] Half of those “tissue masses” are female; I’ve always wondered, “What of that woman’s rights?”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail. You can also subscribe without commenting.