Explore by Topic
Explore by Format
Search Results | 27 results found
I hear all this talk about how the Republicans are going to work in dealing with parents who have both the joy…and the difficulty of raising a child who has a developmental disability, who were born with a birth defect,” he said. “Well, guess what folks? If you care about it, why don't you support stem cell research?
Joe Biden’s recent remarks about his “personal view” on abortion on Meet the Press prompted a question on this blog regarding how an STR ambassador might respond. Since one of the elements of diplomacy is wisdom—an artful method—here is my own tactical approach to Biden’s so-called “modified pro-choice view.” Biden said he didn’t want to impose his own “religiously based view” that life begins at conception on those who didn’t agree with him. I have a couple of questions for the Senator.
Parental consent laws for minors seeking abortion are supported by the majority of Americans, yet pro-abortion advocates have vigorously opposed passage of these laws. The latest opposition comes from Ellen Goodman writing for St. Louis Today whose argument proves too much. Goodman’s argument seems to be that the logic of parental consent laws legitimizes abduction and forced abortion.
Tracking the feedback on my abortion posts of the last few days (see “Were You Ever an Unborn Child” below), I realize a response is in order. On the Bible Answer Man broadcast this week I offered a simple syllogism to capture the essence of the moral logic of the pro-life position as I see it:
Some observers denounce the use of the word “murder” to describe the destruction of a fetus. Yet this “rhetoric” is completely consistent with the laws of most states, including California.
It doesn’t seem to make sense to say you once were a sperm or an egg. Does it make sense, though, to talk about yourself before you were born? Did you turn in your mother’s womb or kick when you were startled by a loud noise? Did you suck your thumb? If so, were those your experiences or someone (or some thing) else’s?
I am consistently amazed at the “consistently pro-life,” those who reject capital punishment as a matter of principle (the so-called “seamless garment” argument). Exactly what principle is in play here? Strict “pro-life” consistency requires more than opposition to executions. It requires the Eastern doctrine of ahimsa: harm no living thing, including microbes and mosquitoes.