Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Rodney
I'd have more respect for the concept if pro-peace and anti-war themes were included in "Sanctity of Human Life" observations, on an equal footing with abortion.
A human life is a human life, and I cannot see why protesting the death of children in other countries as collateral damage in our nation's wars wouldn't be equally as important. If the sanctity of life, per se, is actually what's on the table here. I don't think you can separate abortions and collateral damage deaths morally, in good conscience; and I fear that the only reason for trying to do so is political.
There are anti-abortion, pro-peace Christians, and I respect them totally for their well-thought-out, consistently-applied beliefs.
|
Rodney, thanks for a thoughtful response.
I agree that all life is sacred to God, and it would be wonderful if all humanity treated it as such. I appreciate much of the humanitarian work our military is currently trying to do, while at the same time trying to secure peace by meeting a ruthless force with a forceful response. From what I know of the efforts of our military, I don't believe they consider children to be "collateral damage" when unfortunately they are innocent victims of armed conflict.
I wonder, would you protest the terrorists for their indiscriminate acts often times purposefully committed against civilians? Do you protest them? Have you? How have you? I am asking to sincerely learn, and not to be provocative.
Do you think, if the terrorists were in control, as they were in Afghanistan, they would have allowed you the freedom to voice your opposition? Clearly the Taliban [sp?] held quite a different standard for those disagree with them. Tienamin [sp?] Square still echoes with the blood of those rolled under by government tanks when they were trying to peacefully voice their protest.
I'm all for peace. But I also realize there have been times when armed conflict was necessary in order to pursue peaceful objectives. Would you argue that we should not have engaged an enemy which attacked us in WW2? Would you argue that we shouldn't have tried to hold back communism as it attempted to spread, and it surely would have spread further and more effectively if not checked at all.
Would you argue that we shouldn't have attempted to pursue those who ruthlessly murdered thousands of our innocent citizens on 9-11?
If you can't respect that I don't of necessity see an inconsistency in holding these beliefs which you suggest are opposed, then I respectfully disagree.
I'm sure it often baffles some who don't understand how some Christians, like myself, can say we are "pro-life" while opposing abortion and at the same time supporting the need for governments to sometimes "bear the sword," but in a fallen and imperfect world, it is sadly sometimes necessary. I wish it weren't so, and I pray for the Lord to hasten His return so that there truly will be peace on earth.
[We see a similar apparent dichotomy in being pro-life while supporting the death penalty. Again, I don't see an inconsistency, though I appreciate how some may misunderstand the positions -- and I'm already looking to duck for cover for what some might construe as an intemperate remark! I believe our penal system has lost it's proper sense of retributive justice, and while I hope all who commit a crime which society might deem worthy of the ultimate punishment find peace with God before punishment is meted out, I still believe that it is sometimes necessary. I will say that if we carried out the death penalty according the standards in the Bible -- as I understand it -- there would be far fewer death penalty cases, but the standard would ensure they they truly were guilty.]
Blessings.