But by the grace of God I am what I am: and his grace which was bestowed upon me was not in vain; but I laboured more abundantly than they all: yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me.
1 Corinthians 15:10 KJV
The Irresistible Revolution
"While the voices of blockbuster movies and pop culture cry out for a life outside the matrix of numb efficiency, Christianity often has offered little to the world, other than the hope that things will be better in heaven."
"Sometimes we speak out to change the world, and other times we speak to try to keep the world from changing us."
"In our culture of "seeker sensitivity" and radical inclusivity, the great temptation is to compromise the cost of discipleship in order to draw a larger crowd. With the most sincere hearts, we do not want to see anyone walk away from Jesus because of the discomfort of his cross, so we clip the claws on the Lion a little, we clean up a bit the bloody Passion we are called to follow."
"We would like to include people like the rich ruler and Ananias and Sapphira, but we would end up with the sort of Christianity that arose after Constantine, in which everyone can be a Christian but no one knows what a Christian is anymore."
"For us, belief is only the beginning. What really matters is how we live, how what we believe gets fleshed out, so we also have a statement of orthopraxis (meaning, "right living, right practices"). And this is where most belief-oriented faith communities fall short. They tell us only what they believe, but they do not tell us how their beliefs affect their lifestyles."
"We live in an age in which people, when they hear the word Christian, are much more likely to think of people who hate gays than people who love outcasts, and that is a dangerous thing."
"The world has seen Christian extremists who will blow up abortion clinics and dance on doctors' graves. We have seen Christian extremists who hold signs that say, "God hates fags." The world has seen Christian extremists who declare war in the name of the Lamb. But where are the Christian extremists for love and grace?"
- Template By:LunaStone
- Powered By: Blogger
- Imgs Hosted By: PhotoBucket
- Rounded Corner Script From: Neurotic - Web Design
Non traditional thoughts about life, the world, and God from a Christian's perspective.
"I am seized with fear that my own will will be given place, and I will thus ruin my usableness for God. It would be easy to follow my feelings...to interfere with the voice of the Lord when He says, 'This is the way, walk ye in it.' "
Elisabeth Elliott
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Abortion is apparantly "a moral good"Some bloggers make me so mad I want to spit nails. Some women make me so mad I usually let a few 4 letter words fly (only in my head, of course). So what happens when it's a woman blogger who makes me mad?
Don't ask.
I can't believe that there are people out there like Amanda Marcotte. Amanda is one of the contributors to the Pandagon, and the author of this little gem here.
She takes the position that having an abortion (and she does clarify that she means the actual procedure, not just the right to have one) is a moral good because women are thinking of their own well-being and the well-being of their families when they make the decision to have one.
What about the well being of the baby whose life she's choosing to end?
It seems to me that having an abortion is, in most (not all) cases, an extremely selfish act.
She says:
Women who get abortions should be recognized as people who can accurately weigh their choices and make the most moral one.
Then she goes on to laud the unsung "heroes" - the men and women who perform the abortions.
There are really no words for this kind of woman.
Blogs that link here: Pursuing Holiness, Dumb Ox News, Right Voices, and Third World County.
Posted by Amanda at 2/28/2007 01:13:00 PM
6 Comments
posted at 2/28/2007 02:19:00 PM
There are words. Amanda Marcotte fancies herself a "progressive" and a feminist, I'm sure. Let her talk. The more she talks, the more she harms her causes and the less relevant she becomes. Perhaps the only reason you even found her opinion is that she was so vicious and profane on her personal blog that she "resigned" from John Edwards' presidential campaign staff.
http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2007/02/amanda_marcotte_resigns_from_edwards_campaign/
My word for her, after reading about "Christofascists" and other endearing terms for Christians who disagree with her (her tirades against the Roman Catholic Church are my favorite) on her blog, is "viper".
Musicguy posted at 2/28/2007 02:58:00 PM
Sigh.
The religious right has succeeded in demonizing people in order to further their causes. For instance, women who have had an abortion are painted as shameless whores who sleep with many different men and use abortion as a form of birth control. They paint gay men as sex-crazed, drug addicted party boys who spend most of their lives in clubs, drinking and grinding with other sex crazed drug addicted homos.
Although both of the above might exist, to generalize and assume ALL people in those catagories are the same is a terrible mistake.
I very much understand what Amanda is talking about- from personal experience:
At my second church job, I became very good friends with a woman from the parish. She was the single mother of two boys, ages 2 and 4. Her husband died from a brain anurism a year before I met her. Recently, she had been diagnosed with lung cancer.
Just when you thought it couldn't get any worse, she was raped on the way home from her THIRD job that day. She became pregnant and had one hell of a decision before her.
Two children already, cancer ridden and now pregnant. She decided to abort the baby, not willing to bring a child into this situation.
I tend to believe that was the moral decision in this instance. There are those who'll scream and shout that she did the wrong thing, but my opinion will never sway.
Less than a year later, Christa died and the two children have been in and out of foster care since then. I lost track of them a few years later, and have no idea where they ended up. I think it's a very good thing she didn't bring that third child into the world, into that awful situation.
We don't know what people are going through and it is wrong to generalize and assume we know what is best for them.
In closing, one of my favorite Gospel quotes, used this past weekend at church:
"Stop judging and you will not be judged. Stop condemning and you will not be condemned. Forgive and you will be forgiven. Give and gifts will be given to you; a good measure, packed together, shaken down, and overflowing, will be poured into your lap. For the measure with which you measure will in return be measured out to you."
Amanda posted at 2/28/2007 03:07:00 PM
Sigh right back.
The religious right has succeeded in demonizing people in order to further their causes.
I'm not part of the religious right. I'm not part of the religious left, either. I don't disagree with you that there are people who demonize other people. But I really don't think that's relevant.
Although both of the above might exist, to generalize and assume ALL people in those catagories are the same is a terrible mistake.
I agree.
I understand your position. Especially in a case like the one you mentioned. I just disagree with you. I don't think women who have abortions are evil. I think they made a bad choice, but I don't think they're this awful plague that we must rid ourselves of.
A woman like Amanda Marcotte is in a completely different place when it comes to an issue like this. I don't want to say she's evil, but she comes pretty darn close. She's not pro-choice, she's pro-abortion. There's a difference.
Lifewish posted at 2/28/2007 03:56:00 PM
If I understand Ms Marcotte correctly, what she's saying is that it is morally proper to prioritise the welfare of human beings over the existence of a microscopic cluster of cells. In many cases, the resulting calculation may indicate that abortion is the best solution. In which case, abortion would be the most moral path.
At least I think that that's what she's saying...
Whether you agree with this argument or not depends, of course, on whether you accept its premises concerning the relative worth of human and blastula - but the logic itself seems sound. And from this perspective, if you live in a society that dislikes abortion, having one could even be considered a courageous action.
ontheedgeofmyseat posted at 2/28/2007 04:33:00 PM
Here's a rarity: I see both parties' points, even as a strong pro-lifer. There are many instances where a child is born into a very tough life and it may have been better for them not to be born.
However, who are we to make that decision? (Please bear in mind that I believe life begins at conception.) I have a dear friend who is not only a rape baby, but the rape was incestual. Her mother was unmarried and a drug addict. She could have aborted her, but instead she gave her up for adoption. This friend grew up in a loving home and is now married, expecting, and working with children. All I'm saying is that there's no way we can know if their life will be good or bad because we can't tell the future. We have no right to determine whether our child will live or die.
Lifewish posted at 3/06/2007 12:29:00 PM
However, who are we to make that decision?
In this situation, failure to have an abortion would be a positive decision to have a baby. Who are we to make that decision?
The answer is the same in both cases. "We" (referring to the mothers-to-be) are the people who are stuck with the decision. Whether we have the "right" to do so is irrelevant - we have the responsibility.
She could have aborted her, but instead she gave her up for adoption.
My point is not that she was wrong to do that, but that it was right for it to be her decision.
Remember, there are people out there (such as the Chinese govt) who feel that forced abortion is a good thing. I personally don't like abortion, so I'm keen not to give these folk any legal authority over other people's reproduction.
If we legislate that women cannot have abortions, we have no moral high ground if it's ever legislated that women must have abortions. For this reason if nothing else, I feel that legislating against abortion is a bad idea - it sets an absolutely dreadful precedent.
This is IMO a pretty sound general principle. At present, the only arguments against abortion are based on religious precepts or (like my own reservations) on personal distaste. If we legislate on that basis, we give tacit authorisation to everyone else to legislate based on their personal convictions.
Read up on Queens Mary and Elizabeth I of England if you want to see where that leads...