abortion

editorial

terry lefler home

portrait art

portrait fees

how to order

fine art

about me

privacy

links

Bridget's Art

complete list of  editorials:

2004 election    *    "Sanctity of Life" is a "false doctrine"      *    Abortion       Divorce

God's Purpose for Hurricane Katrina    *   Why Do Muslims Hate Jews?   *   Masturbation

The Meaning of Life    *   Why Churches Don't Have Unity    *    Who Can Be Saved?

Can you love Jesus too much?

A personal history:

When I was young, I paid for an abortion.  Years later, after becoming a Christian, I realized that I was wrong to do that and repented.

Many years later I began to oppose the unfettered use of abortion.  On a number of occasions, I picketed at abortion clinics.  I attended a number of anti-abortion rallies and an anti-abortion march in Tallahassee, Florida.

Over the years,  I regularly listened to James Dobson in his "Focus on the Family" radio broadcast.  Some years ago, I heard James Dobson speak about Christians using violence as a tool to oppose abortion.  I can't remember the exact words, but as I recall, the essence of the message was that James Dobson did not condemn the violence but, rather, understood why people could conclude that violence was appropriate.  It was clear to me that this legitimized violence as a tool, and gave tacit approval to the groups that wanted to move to violent confrontations at abortion clinics.

I knew that it would only be a matter of time before Christian terrorist would be killing people, in the name of Jesus, at abortion clinics.   At that point, I withdrew from the anti-abortion movement and stopped listening to James Dobson.

*******************************************

no middle ground on abortion:

If there is a middle ground on the abortion issue, I don't know where it is and I don't know who is standing there.  All we seem to have are the extreme-left pro-abortion group (make abortion available for any and every reason) and the extreme-right anti-abortion group (no abortion for any reason).

*******************************************

an overview of the extremist groups stands on abortion:

The good and the bad about the pro-abortion stand:

The good:

• provides for individual choice

• leaves the decision in the hands of the people most affected

• keeps the court system out of the abortion issue

The bad:

• does not reconcile us, as a nation, with God

• allows for abortion for any-and-every reason

The good and the bad about the anti-abortion stand:

The good:

• would reconcile us, as a nation, with God

• would reduce the number of abortions that are for convenience

The bad:

• would not stop abortion but would, rather, make it illegal

• would impose a legalistic and extreme set of laws that have already been proven not to work

• would require that anyone who did get approval for an abortion would have to go through an extensive and expensive legal process to get permission for the procedure

• would return the nation to the days of the back-room abortion and the self-induced abortion with a coat hanger

*******************************************

an examination of the Evangelical Christian stands on abortion:

There are two major issues involved in the Evangelical Christian anti-abortion movement. 

1. The Catholic Church's "Sanctity of Life" movement opposes the taking of life for any reasons.  I consider the "Sanctity of Life" doctrine to be "false doctrine" (see "Sanctity of Life" is a "false doctrine" ).  The input from this group should be regarded as unscriptural and extremist. 

2. The legitimate need to reconcile the nation with God.   

   This is the most important Evangelical Christian demand.  Let me try to explain why.

   In the Old Testament, the Bible repeatedly states that God will punish and destroy a nation that allows the shedding of innocent blood.  Certainly, you can’t get more innocent that an unborn baby.  (You can call it a “fetus” all you want.  It is still an unborn baby.)  God will forgive the individual and the nation that sheds innocent blood, if they repent. 

   God is holding the blood of the aborted babies against the United States of America.  Our country is being punished, and will continue to be punished.  here are two examples of that punishment:

   a)   We currently have a lot of trouble with Social Security system because there are not enough young workers to pay for the retirement of the “baby boomers.”  There aren’t enough workers because we have killed millions of them in abortion clinics. 

   b)  The shortage of workers is also forcing us to allow foreign workers to enter the United States.  Most of the Southwest will soon be in the control of voters of Mexican descent.  (Under Mexico's current law, abortion is permitted only in cases of genetic deformities, rape or danger to the health of the mother.)  God, as a part of His justice, is taking the country out of the control of the people that approved abortion and is turning the nation over to people who have not approved abortion.

 In the end, the United States will either be destroyed, by God, when the sin of our nation “has reached its full measure.”             (Genesis 15:16) or will be turned over to other people, as is currently happening.

*******************************************

my opinion:

abortion- a personal right or wrong:

Some years ago, I saw an evening newscast about a mother who was refusing to let a hospital stop the life-support for her baby, even though the hospital said that the child was brain dead and that there was no hope of recovery.  The point that the newscast wanted to make was that hundreds-of-thousands of dollars were being wasted to keep this baby alive (the medical fees were being paid by tax dollars).

I got something entirely different out of the story.  The mother, when asked why she wouldn't allow the hospital to stop the life-support, said words to the effect that "she just couldn't stand to let the baby go".  The mother's concern was not for the baby but, rather, for herself because she would be overwhelmed by the loss.  Selfishness is not a good motivation for deciding the life and death issues concerning babies.

In this case and in other cases, such as abortion, it is the "intention of the heart" that defines "right" and "wrong".  God looks on the intentions of the heart and uses the motives of the heart to measure "innocence" and "sin".  Since humans are not able to make those "intention of the heart" measurements, any attempt to do so by the judicial system will cause great stress to our society.

Abortion is taking the life of an unborn baby.  This "taking of life" can be a sin, if done for selfish reasons, or it can be innocent, if done for the sake of "mercy".   The difference is in the "intentions of the heart".

The decision to have an abortion is fundamentally a personal issue and, if done for the wrong reasons, is a personal sin.

The problem for our society and for the nation occurs when the government begins to regulate the use of abortion.  Here are some points to consider regarding the need for regulation of abortion:

• Since there is a God in Heaven, and since that God cares about the "taking of life", and since there is a stiff penalty for the "taking of innocent life", it is necessary that the nation establish laws that will bring God's "favor" and avoid God's "wrath".   

• It is not acceptable for our nation to have laws that allow for the "taking of life" for any-and-every reason because God will not approve of our behavior.   The use of abortion must be regulated and limited.  

• We can, as a nation, come into right standing with God by making laws that restrict abortions to medically necessary procedures and to instances where the abortion is being done for the sake of "mercy". 

• The consequences for any "sin" concerning the choice to have an abortion need to be put onto the individual, where it belongs, and taken off of the nation.

• We can avoid the quagmire of "judging" the individual's decisions by making abortion illegal except for certain circumstances.  The mother would have to swear that the abortion was for those reasons and could then have an abortion.  If the mother lied, she would be guilt of the crime of "lying under oath" and would be punished according to the laws concerning that crime.

what should an individual consider in making a decision about abortion:

There are many considerations that a person or family take into account  when confronted by a major health crisis.  In the case of abortion:

• What is best for the baby ?

• What is best for the mother ?

• What is best for the family ?

• What is best for society ?

there is no personal righteousness in forced obedience:

Remember that Jesus said in MT 5:28 (NIV):

But I tell you that anyone who looks on a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

By the same logic, if a woman would have gotten an abortion but is forced to have the child she is still guilty of the intention to kill the child.  There is no personal righteousness in forced obedience.

comments on the positions:

• 1) Repeal of "Roe v. Wade" will not "stop" abortion it will only make it illegal.

  I remember, before "Roe v. Wade", that a girl in my high school class had an abortion.  her parents found out about the abortion and turned-her-in to the police.  She was convicted of a crime and spent some years in jail.

  If the Evangelical /Catholic coalition has it's way, the horror stories about back room abortion clinics and abortions performed using coat hangers will be true once more. 

   

• There are two reasons why we can't agree on some reasonable restrictions and controls on abortion:

            1) the far-left pro-choice group

            2) the far-right Evangelical/Catholic anti-abortion group

            These two groups purpose to polarize the issues so that there can be no compromise.

•  The majority of the American people want some restriction on abortion but are not willing to go back to the "bad old days." 

• If "Roe v. Wade" is overturned the battle for abortion rights will switch to the states.  There will be war in the streets.

*******************************************

Proposed position for compromise on abortion:

These issues need to be resolved:

1)  The nation needs to be reconciled with God concerning the abortion issue.  It cannot be the "law of the land" that a person can kill a baby for any-and-every-reason.

I would propose that the "law of the land" would declare that it is legal for a woman to get an abortion for any of the following reasons:

1)      the pregnancy is a threat to the mental or physical good health of the mother

2)      the pregnancy is the result of rape of rape or incest

3)      there is reason to believe that the fetus has significant mental or physical defects

Any other reason would be considered to be illegal.  This would take the sin off of the nation and put it where it belongs - on the individual.   

2)  The decisions should be left in the hands of the people most affected (the mothers)

3)   The legalism of the Evangelical/Catholic coalition must be avoided.  It is important that there is no burden of proof put on the woman.  If she lies, the sin is between her and God.  This is similar in nature to the “don’t ask – don’t tell” policy concerning homosexuals in the military.   This would avoid any kind of judging by the legal system.

What if, as they certainly will, someone lies about the reason for having an abortion and later is accused of lying and it is proven that they have lied.  What should be the legal penalty?   The crime would be for "contempt of court" or "lying under oath".  The penalty would be in-line with those crimes.

©Terry Lefler, 06/2005  All rights reserved