Tag: pro life

Categories
Opinions

Why I Don’t Care About Abortion

In the aftermath of the L.I.F.E. Club panel, a good portion of the resulting conversation has been devoted to whether or not the question “When does life begin?” was properly addressed. No matter the speaker’s opinion about the panel as a whole, all voices seemed to agree that this is vital question that needs to be addressed before any dialogue concerning abortion can occur. I have to say, I think this precondition is incredibly damaging, regardless of which position you take.

lydai copyThe motives of those who ask this question are the same: to determine whether or not abortion can be considered morally wrong, and therefore punishable by the law. Pro-lifers push toward conception. Pro-choicers push toward birth. Each wants to feel justified in their argument. They want to feel irrefutable. And so they seek out ultimatums. Is abortion murder? From each side comes either a resounding yes or no. The problem is that this becomes the beginning and end of the conversation. No middle ground can be reached. And few people have realized that this is perhaps the most irrelevant question anyone could be asking.

To begin with, let’s look at what’s being said. There are those who are pro-life. They see abortion as a definitive act of killing. Something was created, and abortion destroyed it. They want abortion to be completely illegal. They are “anti-abortion.” If that’s one side of the argument, then the other side should be… “Pro-death”? No, that’s not it. Are they “pro-abortion”? No, that’s not it either. Pro-lifers are anti-abortion, but they are facing off against those who identify themselves as pro-CHOICE. Is it just me, or are “life” and “choice” not exactly opposites? Perhaps the reason the arguments between the two camps haven’t been going anywhere is that they aren’t actually arguing about the same thing.

No one, I can guarantee you, no one besides Daniel Tosh is out there in the world swinging a sign that reads “We should have abortions!” Rather, the appeal is this: “We should have the RIGHT to have abortions!” Most of you reading this will likely believe that abortion is killing, and that killing is wrong. You’ll also most likely think that no one should have the right to kill. But since there’s also no one out there (I’m guessing) with a sign that says “We should have the right to murder!” there must be something different about abortion. There’s clearly a reason that anyone would fight to allow this action, or to contradict its immorality. So, these are the questions that we should be asking, to replace the extraneous question of life: What are the reasons for abortion? And, what can we do to eliminate those reasons?

A person’s choice to have an abortion is, of course, inspired by any number of unfortunate factors: poverty, rape, incest, age, violence, medical issues, mental instability, and any number of extreme situations— there are babies born into slavery and prostitution, babies born destined to end up abandoned.  Whether or not you agree that all of these circumstances merit an abortion, certainly you can see how some of them do, or at the very least, you can recognize the need for a system that can be responsible for the infants it prevents from being aborted. You can recognize the need for improved sex education. You can recognize the need for a change.

So, is abortion murder? Who cares? The truth is, abortion does not matter. It doesn’t. If the main bone you have to pick is simply a question of the beginning and end of life, you need to broaden your focus to include any kind of death—death from war, death from starvation, death disease. All of these deaths, including death from abortion, grow out of the same causes—poverty, power and control, lack of education, terrible situations. Untimely deaths will not cease until these causes are eradicated. So in the meantime, yes: women should have the right to have an abortion. And, no: we should not talk about whether or not that’s wrong. Because the way to prevent abortion, and war, every other kind of injustice in the world is not to tell people to “just stop.” The way to prevent it is to make it unnecessary. That’s an enterprise I think everyone can support, be they pro-life or pro-choice.

 

Categories
Opinions

L.I.F.E. Club Explains Panel Discussion

L.I.F.E. Club would like to offer a response to the article criticizing the panel discussion. Regarding the preparation, we had a last-minute cancellation because one panelist had to attend to tragic family matters. We contacted professors from diverse disciplines to fill his spot, but all had previous plans. We will gladly include Pro-choice panelists when individuals are willing to publicly advocate this stance.

lifeL.I.F.E. Club believes that God creates life, and life is precious. Although all panelists were Pro-life, they acknowledged different views in varied circumstances. Perhaps our intentions would have been clarified if titled “An Abortion Discussion from Various Christian Perspectives.” Dean Jordan was open-minded, hence his inclusion in the panel. Each panelist’s view played a vital role in the discussion.  Labeling someone a “Bible thumper” was a personal insult, rather than a refutation for his arguments. Furthermore, no Christian can prove that the Bible is a metaphor. Whether metaphorical or not, the value of human life as created by God is clearly communicated throughout Scripture. Accordingly, the first question addressed was, “When does life begin?”

In regards to the panel announcement email: it was not meant to appall anyone; there are countless photos we could have chosen if our purpose was to “horrify” everyone. We intentionally worded the title as a question to get people thinking about how abortion has been referred to as “A Modern Day Holocaust”. We sought to evaluate the truth value of this metaphor, NOT to accuse anyone. We did not blame anyone for perpetuating a Holocaust, nor did we equate anyone to Nazis. Attendees who listened heard that panelists did not relate abortion to a new Holocaust because the Holocaust eradicated innocent lives due to pure evil hatred, while abortion does not typically occur due to a mother’s hatred of her fetus. The email stated that discussion would feature questions such as “What does the Bible say about abortion?” and “When does life really begin?” It encouraged people to ask questions and discuss stances. Given those facts, we do not understand how it “suggested that one viewpoint would automatically dominate the event”. Questions were open-ended so they could be addressed in further detail, which is what happened. We recognize that there are various perspectives related to abortion, but time did not allow for us to discuss each one. We trusted that audience members would question and comment about Pro-choice views when given the opportunity. We did not anticipate everyone to gain a full understanding or acceptance of every issue discussed, but hoped that this would induce future conversation.

Even on a campus that claims to live out Christian ideals, we cannot expect all God’s children to agree upon a “correct response” to contentious topics. Everybody interprets Scripture differently no matter which denomination we identify ourselves with. Incontrovertibly, individuals will not agree with every chapel service but can evaluate their own understanding of Scripture, instead of criticizing everything the speaker said with which they disagreed.

We truly apologize if we offended anyone. Our goal was to promote deep thought about issues which often remain silent in our community. All positions cannot be understood if we are afraid to begin talking, for fear of offending people whose beliefs differ from our own. We think the panel was not a “disappointment,” but rather a time to reflect on our opinions concerning this matter as it relates to our lives as Christians. Panelists believed that we should sympathetically support those who have been affected by abortion. We recognize that though everyone acknowledges different views, as believers, we are united by the Word of God, which declares that love will triumph above all dissension.

 

Categories
Opinions

L.I.F.E. Club Panel Disappoints

I was horrified when I first received the L.I.F.E. club email stating in big bold letters “Abortion: A Modern Day Holocaust?” that was accompanied by the feet of what appeared to be an infant.  I was horrified not because of my views on abortion, but because of the way the e-mail presented the event. The email claimed to be a panel “discussion” yet the way information was presented did not suggest any “discussion” would occur.  Instead the email suggested that one viewpoint would automatically dominate the event. In addition to my horror, we must realize that even in this small community; there are most likely people who have experienced the effects of abortion to one degree or another. Therefore I do not feel that we should abruptly equate our fellow sisters and brothers to Nazis. Regardless of the impressions I received from the email, I decided to attend, hoping that researched opinions and detailed thought would be respectfully presented.

allysonSadly my hope was, for the most part, in vain–the panel quickly veered in one direction and rarely slowed down to think about other avenues of opinion.  However, though the conversation repeatedly traveled in one direction, I as well as fellow students, were very thankful to have Dean Jordan present. He continually inserted thought-provoking responses that were honest; reminding the students that there are not easily deduced answers when it comes to society’s issue of abortion. However, this was not as true of the other two speakers.

The male guest speaker was a Bible-thumper, who continually repeated kitschy catchy phrases such as, “We have the World View, and then we have the Word View” or “God is Scripture and Scripture is God.” I assure you, Scripture is not cut and dry. Issues dealing with morality are rarely-if ever- black and white. Yes John 1 does say, “In the beginning was the word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God” but the Bible speaks in metaphor. As one student at the panel pointed out, there are thousands of denominations within the Protestant Church alone: clearly believers do not commonly agree on many issues regarding the hermeneutics of scripture. In relation to this, Dean Jordan again pointed us to the important realization that the Bible never addresses abortion, but instead discusses the value of life as a theme prevalent within the Bible. We should approach abortion as intellectuals who can support opinions within secular communities, not just as believers who speak up in our small, faith-based town.

The female guest speaker reverted to a repeated tactic of statistical references throughout the discussion, and at one point admitted to looking up facts online recently to ensure she would have information to bring to the panel.  Statistics work for initial effect, but we have heard them before and we will hear them again. When bombarded with statistics, one does not often come away with new thoughts to dwell on, but rather one comes away with a jumble of disorienting facts that are hard to process. Also this guest speaker was a Catholic and I, like other students, expected the discussion to at least briefly deal with the differences between Catholic and Protestant viewpoints on contraception, but this was never formally addressed. Instead, references were made to the differing thoughts, but time was not devoted to discussing this rift within the Church.

Lastly, the discussion was not clearly focused from the beginning. I expected the first question to be a starting point that dealt with the definition of when life truly starts. This question was only addressed at the end, when a student asked for individualized definitions from each panelist.

Overall I was disappointed. The issue of abortion is regarded as a very heated discussion both inside the church and within the secular world. Students should experience a discussion that holds differing opinions respectfully presented in a way that stimulates an individual’s thought instead of staunching it. Students who are not encouraged to carefully think about issues will not be ready to confidently present his/her own thoughts when given the chance later in life.

Next time the L.I.F.E Club creates a panel discussion, I suggest they bring in a pro-choice opinion–there are academics in our community who hold this view. I also propose they find more readily equipped panelists to argue each side.  This campus also holds people who have devoted time and energy into Pro-Life viewpoints through continual research from both a Christian perspective and a secular perspective.  Once again, I was extremely glad that Dean Jordan had a voice in this discussion, but I wish the panel had been better prepared and more diverse.