October 14, 2004
And while the stew boils, abortion stirs...
I have to admit something. Abortion has never been an issue that concerned me very much… As a typical evangelical Christian in my upbringing, I was typically pro-life. And possibly untypically, for my generation of evangelical Christians, I leaned heavily toward “with exception.” But, due to my lifestyle, I knew that abortion would probably never enter my scope of decsion-making — or, rather, co-decision-making. But, beyond my stance on the “rights” and/or “wrongs” of abortion, the one thing I have never felt very strongly about was the illegalization of abortion. I had just seen too much passion behind people who wanted it illegal — and, I’m talking about hateful passion — and not enoug love being poured out to expectant mother’s who needed love and not judgment. Also, even at a young age, I knew that causes and effects of abortion were never an outcome of lawmaking whether it supported abortion or not.
But, don’t get me wrong. I am pro-life…personally. I am even helping my sister with a website for her workplace. But, I don’t think that I could ever subscribe to the various mission statements that some pro-life organizations profess. In any case, it surprised me by how passionate people became at this Blog a few days ago. I mean, I did list abortion as an issue that I was still trying to tackle, but it was placed amidst five other issues — which, in my mind are equally as important.
But, I digress. What I wanted to talk about today was my early inclinations of the causes of abortion.
I am a Christian ethicist, and trained in statistical analysis. I am consistently pro-life. My son David is one witness. For my family, “pro-life” is personal. My wife caught rubella in the eighth week of her pregnancy. We decided not to terminate, to love and raise our baby. David is legally blind and severely handicapped; he also is a blessing to us and to the world.(Read the rest here. Link via Deanne Pearson.)
I look at the fruits of political policies more than words. I analyzed the data on abortion during the George W. Bush presidency. There is no single source for this information – federal reports go only to 2000, and many states do not report – but I found enough data to identify trends. My findings are counterintuitive and disturbing.
The article goes on to conclude:
Economic policy and abortion are not separate issues; they form one moral imperative. Rhetoric is hollow, mere tinkling brass, without health care, health insurance, jobs, child care, and a living wage. Pro-life in deed, not merely in word, means we need policies that provide jobs and health insurance and support for prospective mothers.I strongly usrge you to read the entire article.
In my opinion, this is why we can’t look at Bush as the “moral” leader in this year’s Presidential race just based on his stance on abortion. To me, this falls into the same category as “abortion vs. capital punishment.” Can we honestly vote for someone who is against abortion when they support other types of killing?
It’s a good question. And I don’t know the answer.
I’m still not prepared to make public whom I’m leaning towards in this race. Abortion is just one of the issues, and there are many — in fact, just last night, my small group discussed most of the issues that we need to look at. And issues themselves are just one aspect as well. We also need to look at the person — at his personality and his life. The documetary that I mentioned on Tuesday night helped me to deal with this factor.
Posted at 1:23 pmTrackback: