g

Monday, October 03, 2005

Prolife Response

This post is in response to a sincere question posted on the WTM Boards that has since been deleted (due to Hot Topic Overload Syndrome that plagues the boards on occasion.) The question was:


 


"Sincere question - why don't pro-life activists work to overturn death penalty laws and be less supportive of war? What's the difference between the unborn and the already living?"


 


Feel free to post any responses you like, but I would sure like it if it stayed friendly.


 


Warmly,


Kate


 






"Sincere question - why don't pro-life activists work to overturn death penalty laws and be less supportive of war?"


The first answer would be that a baby has committed no crime and has no "price" to pay. It is an innocent being that is a person in its own right.


The law of our land says: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."  The unborn have wrongly lost their rights and those in authority that contributed to that had no right to take that away from them. Therefore we will fight to have them returned. It is clearly murder of one's child to commit abortion.


A person on death row committed a crime that landed him/her there - that was the lawful price of his/her crime. It is well known that the price for committing certain crimes is death. They *chose* that for themselves. The unborn has no choice. I don't think they are comparable - innocent life to a person paying a clearly known price for his/her crime.


As far as war goes, I cannot think of a single person I know that supports "war" in and of itself. The killing of other persons in a war should be something that is the very last resort when all other avenues have failed and there is no option but to protect one's own land and people from enemy invaders. The last real declared war was WWII and what we have now is not a Constitutional war.


I can only answer for myself in that while I don't know if we should be where we are or not, we *are* there and we need to finish what needs to be done and get our men and women out and back to their families. War is grevious all around - to liberals and conservatives alike. It too is also a choice. We choose to go to war by those we elect, we choose to enter the service of the army, navy, air force, national guard, etc. with the knowledge that we may some day go to war. It is not the same for the unborn. I don't think you can equate war to abortion - I just do not think they are comparable.


"What's the difference between the unborn and the already living?"


In my book, there is none. That is why we strive to protect them.


Warmly,
Kate

8 comments:

sparrow said...

Hi Kate,


I'm going to give you a break and NOT comment on a controversial topic! Yes, it's true, she CAN shut up! :)


Can't wait to read the answers though! :)

underthesky said...

You can always comment - for or against anything I write. That is one of the blessings of blogging - you get to hear other voices out there!


Warmly,

Kate


Butch said...

Okay, that makes sense. The premise I've most often heard is the commandment "thou shall not kill", but that never made much sense to me, considering how often killing has been justified. It might surprise many people that my own support of abortion is minimal, and only in terms of legal abortion as an alternative to illegal and unsafe abortion. Thank you for your answer.

Anonymous said...

Governments have legal responsibilities, and those responsibilities include protecting the governed. As Kate said, war is a last resort in this arena. And the death penalty might be as well, although there can be honest debate about that...but at any rate, it is not death meted out by an individual, but by a government according to law. Abortion is not the protection of the individual by the government but the decision by an individual about the rights of herself and another individual. There isn't a "due process" that goes beyond the individual. If that were true in the former cases, it would be called "vigilante justice" and "mercenary guerilla warfare"--and that properly would be condemned.


By the way, it is I, Patty in WA, posting this. I'm just too lazy to register.

underthesky said...

Patty, thank you for adding your wise words to the conversation. I agree completely.


Butch, thanks for posting!


Sparrow - I am waiting!


:+) Kate

karenciavo said...

Some have told me that the commandment is rightly translated, "Thou shall not murder," which is obviously different that kill. I don't know any Hebrew myself, so I am trusting their word based on other commands God has given, including the death penalty for certain offenses.

sparrow said...

I agree with you, Kate about the distinction between the unborn and the "already living". Your point about even those who support war not truly wanting war was a good one too.

I also like the point about murder and killing not being the same thing necessarily.


Sorry, I don't have anything new (or controversial!) to add! :) It's a great question though.



spunkyhomeschool said...

I like what you said as well Kate. It's not an easy question to answer