Abortion

The basic argument behind abortion usually comes down to whether or not the zygote/embryo/fetus is a human being. Pro-life people insist life begins at conception. Pro-choice people insist human life begins at birth or at some far along point in the pregnancy. The difficulty for pro-choice people is creating some sort of dividing line between human and not human. Conception at least makes for a logical jump to personhood. There are other arguments in favor of abortion. One notable philosopher, Peter Singer, argues that life begins at conception, but there is nothing wrong about terminating the pregnancy. From a utilitarian perspective, by terminating the pregnancy, the baby doesn't lose much (it has virtually no cognitive ability) but the mother has potentially much to gain. Peter Singer goes on to use this argument to even justify infanticide! I have always been in the anti-abortion camp. It never made sense to me to have life begin anywhere but conception and killing an innocent human being seems to go against everything I believe in regardless of any utilitarian gain.

However, I came across this article the other day which discusses when life begins from a biblical perspective. It lays out a fairly convincing argument that, Biblically speaking, human life begins at first breath. Before the baby breathes, it is something less than human. After first breath it becomes a 'living soul.' I will summarize the basic ideas presented:

• Genesis says that Adam did not become a living soul until God breathed the breath of life into his nostrils.
• In the accounts of Jesus and Stephen, their souls departed their physical bodies when they breathed their last.
• When Ezekiel saw the army of dry bones regrow muscle and flesh they were not alive until breathe entered their bodies.
• The author goes on to say that just because a fetus is not a living soul does not necessarily justify abortion
• In addition this raises some interesting questions about embryonic stem cell research
  

After a little more searching I found another article. The author is some sort of Bible Scholar who advocates abortion. While he definitely shows some aggression towards anti-abortionists (he calls anyone who is against every type of abortion a fanatic) , he does make some interesting points. I recommend you take a look.

While I still have extreme moral concerns with abortion, these articles are at least causing me to think.

Why are Christians Conservative?

I've been spending a lot of time thinking about my political beliefs. Coming from a traditional Christian home, it should come as no surprise that I was raised to be a republican. Almost every Christian I know is conservative. The reasons for this seem logical enough. Republicans stand for morals that are closer in line with those of the Bible. The traditional family becomes the example. Father is off at work while the mother drives the two and a half kids to soccer practice in the minivan. They have a nice sized house in a nice suburban area. This is the ideal family that the liberals are trying to destroy. Liberals stand for immorality.

Really though, how many social issues are there in the Democratic party that are anti-christian morally? Abortion, gay rights, embryonic stem cell, and ... what else? Christians have bought into these few issues so thoroughly that they have decided that they can't possibly be democrats and thus buy into everything else that comes with being republicans. Christians in general hate the idea of increased taxes on the rich and having more social programs for the poor. Things like universal health care, increased welfare, etc become associated with the 'evil' democratic party.

Now I know what the typical response is to all this. The government shouldn't be the ones to care for those in need. That job belongs to the church. Or Christians should be the ones to take care of the needy. We shouldn't let the government do it for us. Another argument is that people will just end up taking advantage of these programs. If I give personally then I can be sure that the right people are getting the help. These arguments are weak. Most of the Christians I know do their couple of service events a year and spend the rest of the time focused on themselves. If there were no government programs to help those in need, very few people would ever get help. Of course there are those who will take advantage. But there are so many who are honestly trying but just can't get out of their circumstances through no fault of their own. Do we let those people suffer because there are those who will take advantage of you?

I see nothing particularly christian about the ideal family touted by conservatives. I see a lot that is christian about helping those in need, even if it is through the government. There are still the issues of abortion, gay rights, etc. I have been against legislating against gay marriage for a while now. I say it in that confusing way because I am not exactly for gay marriage. So for me at least, the issue of republican versus democrat comes down to abortion versus suffering of the poor. While I still haven't made up my mind, I think I might be leaning left.

Or I could always go with the tried and true political position of apathy.

Homosexuality

I was planning to do a post on homosexuality at some point but it seems that this conversation is already going over at free convection. I encourage you to take a look and join in the discussion.

Real Post Coming Soon.