SOHLS / week
 

Sanctity of Human Life Sunday / Week is observed from the Sunday to Sunday in January when the 22nd falls, which is the anniversary of the 1973 decisions known as "Roe v. Wade" & "Doe v. Bolton"

Interestingly, as I understand it, both the "Roe" and "Doe" of each case has now changed their position and are now pro-life.

I'm sure many -- probably most -- on the TFP forums would consider themselves "pro choice." However, perhaps there would be some who would be interested in exploring the "pro life" perspective of this particular issue.

If so, here is one place you can visit online ~ A website with resources for those involved in pregnancy center ministries.

For the record, I currently serve on the advisory board of a local PCC.

I would hope -- as many have expressed -- that "tolerance" means each person is allowed to hold and express their views with respect, even if it is respectful disagreement.

I am not presenting this information to in any way or sense "debate" the issue. I often think those who engage in debates online are not really interested in an honest exchange of ideas, but rather are simply setting out to argue their agenda, "regardless."

I'm certainly under no rose colored notions that anyone here who has already made up their mind will change it. My hope is that, if we are going to disagree, let's do so civily, and without exhibiting a "cement mentality" -- a mind that's all mixed up and permanently set, no matter the facts or reasons brought to it.

[And I say that in recognition of some Christians I know... Not so much on this issue, but others.]

"A closed mind is a dying mind." ~ Edna Ferber, Novelist

"A closed mind is a good thing to lose." ~ Anonymous
-----
"A person starts to live when he can live outside himself."
"I am convinced that He (God) does not play dice."
"God is subtle but he is not malicious."
"Weakness of attitude becomes weakness of character."
"Great spirits have often encountered violent opposition from weak minds." ~ Albert Einstein [the above 5]

Blessings.

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.

Welcome to tfp, Pastor!
We are fortunate to have yet another considered and well spoken voice in our mix. The work you do is neccessary, and appreciated.
A pro-life decision is almost always, in my opinion, the correct choice. But it still needs to remain a choice, not a state-dictated doctrine.
You have cited the Taliban as an intolerant state, yet preach pro-life intolerance.
Until the pro-life movement starts supporting reproductive education and stops opposing birth control initiatives (other than abstinance), it cannot, again, in my opinion, make any claims to moral superiority.
Our children need to be raised in a culture of affirmation. They need to be taught how to make rational, well-considered choices, not brow-beaten and finger-wagged into compliance. A properly educated, free thinking population would evolve past the need for abortion legislation before any legal enforcement could eliminate the practice.
(Remember, legal abortions are, at the very least, conducted in a medically controlled environment. Criminalization merely pushes them back into the dark, dangerous underground, where no good is served.)
I am pro-life, but I demand that I be given the choice.

Personally, I don't believe that Jesus would buy that argument. He wouldn't even let his disciples "bear the sword" to try to save him.

Let me list all the things that Jesus does not care about:

* He does not care if we are wealthy, or if we stay wealthy, or if we become poor.
* He does not care about whether we have a large army to send to other countries.
* He does not care about foreign policy; he does not care if we are attacked by other countries.
* He does not even care if America survives. In general, he does not care about nations at all.

What he cares about is what we do with the grace he has granted to us. It's all in the Sermon on the Mount. It is about making the kingdom of heaven on earth, not accepting war and aggression as "just the way things are" until Jesus comes back. And for those who do, what side of the moneychanger's table would Jesus place them on?

What Jesus cares about is what is in our hearts, and the gentle message that he gave to all of us. That message has nothing to do with nations, and is corrupted when we try to join Christianity with the very cold logic of international relations. It doesn't work. It will never work. And this is a lesson that most American Christians, certainly, don't want to hear. God is not on their side. God is on everyone's side.

I'm not criticizing everybody who's pro-war. But trying to make exceptions in Christianity to justify the acts of a particular nation -- Jesus wouldn't do it. Neither should you.

Or as Gandhi once said when asked how he felt about Christianity (somewhat paraphrased): "Christianity? It's a great idea. Too bad it's never been put into practice!" With the cynical wit that only an involuntary member of the British Empire might muster.

Yes, but Jesus also said "If you don't have a sword, go out and buy one" and "I have not come to bring peace, but a sword". This is the guy who, when he found merchants selling things in the temple, used a whip to drive them out. Scripture's teaching on the use of violence is hardly as simple as 'turn the other cheek'.

I have to agree with Rodney.

I was brought up in a Church of England school, and as an adult have realised that I have no faith.

I understand the contents of the bible, I have read it cover to cover on several occasions, and I have no faith.

As someone who knows the contents of the bible, but does not believe in God I am (if there can be such a thing) a "Christian-heritage" atheist - I do not believe that there is no God, I just have never found or experienced anything that gave me faith; however, I was taught all about Jesus and I have a Christianised view of the world.

One cannot choose faith, one either believes in a particular thing or not.

That said - I was taught that Jesus preached that riches could bar the way to heaven, that victims of violence should turn the other cheek, that it was wrong to take up arms, and that a good person took part in the established political order ("render unto Caesar").

He spoke out against wars of liberation - remember the Zealot that he took to be one of his 12?

He spoke out against intolerance - remember the stoning?

All in all, I find that most of the US religious right (as viewed from the UK) are no more "christian" (as defined by "people who follow Jesus' words and deeds") than a house-brick.

I can see the arguments to invade Iraq, or to bomb abortion clinics - I just cannot see how anyone can justify them as being anything to do with a supremely decent, poor, neighbour loving, pacifist that was nailed to a tree 2000 years ago.

How about metaphor?

And there's a big difference between essentially, a protest against corruption in God's name, and war.

Gee, what a dream it would be if soldiers walked around with whips on their belts instead of AK-47s. The world might actually be a nicer place.

On the other hand, can you imagine Christ unloading an automatic weapon on that temple, or dropping an atom bomb on it from above? Probably not. In no way do these kind of actions demonstrate unconditional love for humanity, or God for that matter. Unless your middle name is "Crusader..."

to swing this thread back around to topic-

I totally, wholeheartedly agree with this statement. I cannot understand why the pro-life movement doesn't see how teaching abstinance as the ONLY "appropiate" method of BC is simply NOT WORKING. People want to have sex- sex feels good, and it can be a very loving, spiritual, blessed act of sacredness. I believe that until the public at large (and by "public" I mean everyone of consenting age on earth) is properly educated about sex (the who, what, when, where, how, & why) abortion will be a very large and very real issue around the world.

"God" provided humans with their sexuality in order to enrich their lives. It's unfortunate so many people from so many walks of life have forgotten that, and started looking at sexuality as a moral degradation (no matter who has the sexual urges).

Although I think that this should go in Tilted Philosophy, as this topic has certainly already been discussed at length, I must reply to Pastor Tim, as his request for civility was refreshing.

Tim, you quote sayings that support open-mindness,
And I am left wondering if your mind is open. Can you hold an open mind while serving on the advisory board of a local PCC? (btw, wtf is a ppc? Pregnancy Career Centre? Pregnancy Counselling Centre?)

Obviously pro-life, have you closed your mind to the alternatives, and to the consequences of the end-state in your policy choices? If so, then I caution you to not be so hasty in posting cute quotes proposing open-mindness in the future. If not, can you give detail on your inner struggle to remain open-minded while still taking personal action in such a stark and extreme way?

There are times in my life when I struggle to find a strong moral ground to walk on, and I can only imagine what it is like for anybody else.

It is not that I take offence to anything you are saying, and actually the opposite is true. What I am struggling with is your use of the quotes, yet in my view, your mind is made up already, thus "Closing" your mind on the entire subject. Can you help me understand your use of the term "open mind"? I fear that our definitions differ greatly.

Blessings to you and yours.

Hello, just checking in. I am reading and thinking about responses. But a bit pressed for time right now. I'll keep reading, watching, thinking and trying to replies soon. Blessings.

Blessings yourself, and keep your own mind open as well.

YES. Just because I would not choose that route, does not mean no one else can. Thank you, this is the best description of my feelings on the topic I have read yet.

Hello to ~ dude, Rodney, asaris, Daniel, abaya, sage, Big Ben, & JustJess !

First, I hope I caught all of you who've replied to this thread thus far.

Second, I appreciate reading all of your comments.

Third, I really meant it when I said I am trying to reply to various threads and notes and entries in the order received. So I hope no one feels I am ignoring the issue, or just not responding. In fact, I'm looking forward to further sharing what I believe, and while I do not expect to "convert" you vis a vis the discussion, I do hope we can have an open and civil discussion, and perhaps come to appreciate opposing views better.

I certainly realize Christians sometimes get a bad name from the way some who say they are one act, think and express themselves. I suppose the same is true for any "group" you can label [whether the label is good, bad, justified, self-applied, etc.].

I do hope that some who may think that way -- or perhaps have even been purposefully hurt by a person of faith in the past -- will try to give me a fair hearing. I'd like a chance to prove we're not all mindless aherents to a blind faith who have given no thought to their positions, nor seem able to do so, nor seem able or willing to express them in a friendly manner.

No matter if we end up disagreeing on the issues, I hope we can try to be agreeably disposed towards each other. I hope I have some things which you will find worth sharing, and I am sure some of the things you share will help me better understand the views you hold [and which others sometimes hold, and which in truth can sometimes be classified as opposed to Biblical Christianity].

Thanks taking the time and making the effort to read my thoughts. I hope to post replies soon.

My blessings to you all.

Wow! I must say I am sad and a bit embarrassed that I haven't gotten back to this yet. I never thought I wouldn't be able to. I have been able to participate in some online activities, but I have delayed coming back here in part, it's because I am actively seeking a p/t job, and that really has to be a priority. But also in part it's because what needs to be responded to deserves a thought-filled response. I sure will try to bump this up the scale of my "to do's" and get it done soon. Again, I really am sorry for dropping the ball. God bless.