I’ve given much thought to the pro-life stance and I’ve come to the conclusion that it is inadequate. I feel that we have sold ourselves short by narrowly defining pro-life as anti-abortion. Here is a segment of the items I feel should be discussed within the pro-life community.
- Abortion
- Embryonic Stem Cell Research
- Murder
- War
- The Death Penalty
- Poverty
- Clean Drinking Water
- World Food Supply
- Protecting the Environment
- Obesity
- Drug and Alcohol Abuse
- Smoking
- Physical Fitness
Do you think these issues are relevant to the pro-life discussion? What would you add or subtract?
| permalink |
I would add Gun Control.
I think I would subtract matters that affect only the individual making the choice, e.g. obesity and smoking (inasmuch as these are matters of personal choice; there is also corporate responsibility to consider, though).
Sorry to get semantic on you, but I think when most people say “pro-life”, they mean anti-abortion. Each side in this debate got to name themselves. Pro-lifers oppose abortion, they don’t oppose choice. Pro-chiocers support abortion, they don’t oppose life.
That being said, in your list, I think many items could fall under the category of materialism.
I will confess to being a materialist. I am made out of material, and, as I believe the resurrection body (jargon alert) will be also, I am content to, at least to some extent, continue to be a materialist.
Will, I think I would disagree to an extent. To oppose abortion you limit certain choices. To support abortion you disregard specific instances of life (or redefine it). I would agree that many of these items are materialistic at the core but affect quality and/or longevity of life.
Justin, I would say it is incorrect to assume the matters you mention “affect only the individual making the choice”, especially in matters of personal health. One can only abuse his or her body for so long before it begins to breakdown. The more unhealthy people there are the more money our society as a whole must devote to healthcare. Also, many people will suffer when a loved one suffers through and eventually dies from a terrible but equally preventable disease, not just one.
I’m not advocating that legislation needs to be passed to bring about all of these changes. I just think that these are issues that affect life and should be discussed alongside abortion.
I see two distinct groups here. The first 5 things deal with the existance of life in one way or another. What we think about them has life or death consequences.
The rest of the list (with the possible exception of ‘World Food Supply’) can, ultimately, have those consequences, but really deal more with the quality of life. There are folks that would tell you that, though their life will be shorter if they smoke, it will be better.
I think that distiction is an important one. Things that deal directly with whether someone lives or dies are of greater importance than those that deal with the more subjective ‘quality’ of life.
BTW - I hear you on your criticism of why ‘pro-life’ equals only ‘anti-abortion’. Why not ‘anti-war’ or ‘anti-death penalty’ or ‘pro-clean water’?
I wasn’t trying to over-simplify with my pro-life generalization. I know lots of people who would not call themselves pro-life, simply because of the connection with abortion. Those people however, also oppose smoking, drug abuse, etc. Labels are generally insufficient. Pro-life is one of them.
Regarding my materialism generalization, I feel that many of the listed life issues are only problems because we as a society are so materially wealthy.
Suicide, assisted or otherwise is one. Also, HIV/AIDS is a massive threat to life in many parts of the world. I guess all diseases are but epidemics are maybe a little different.
I see your point, salguod, but I think at some point the quality of life can get so bad that it really falls back into a plain-ol’ life issue. If a child suffers from malnutrition so badly that he/she dies at a very young age, then that is not a “quality” issue at all. Similarly, if a child is born to a drug-addicted mother and is rendered developmentally disabled, I think that falls back into a life issue. I think the demarcation really comes down to a point of personal responsibility. Is the person dying of dysentery from a bad water supply responsible for the condition of that water supply? If no, then I think it falls squarely in the “existence” column and not “quality.”
I think the toughest ethical issues are those we’re facing as a wealthy society: As we develop the ability to stave off death indefinitely, how far should we go? How much money should we spend to keep someone alive? $100K for a heart transplant? How old is too old for something like this to be worthwhile? These decisions are easier when you can’t do anything about the things that kill us, but we’re getting pretty good at the whole not dying thing, and that’s problematic.
“Do you think these issues are relevant to the pro-life discussion?”
Nope, not at all. Not because they’re not important issues, but because “pro-life” was never meant to be a broad term taken literally, it’s just a name. And by context, it’s understood to refer specifically to abortion.
Ian-
Thank you! I can see how murder and stem cell research are relevant, but not the rest, although they are important issues.
I can also see how eternal life (through believing the Gospel message) is relevant, in that there’s not much chance of understanding the real impact of any of these issues without it.
Unfortunately, it seems that some are having difficulty even with the advantage of saving faith
any sin is relevant…Thank God for His mercy upon us who strive to achieve Holiness, fleeing from and avioding sin…who face the reveling Light of purification to be in Christ …one day at a time…Thank Him for His opening Heaven to us who stive in our souls to be obedient unto our deaths……whether we achieve it each day…we get up and continue to never give up in our pursuit of Holiness …and Jesus will represent us as deserving admittance to eternal Heaven…where….no more lacking of peace and simple pure freedom from all of hte stresses and encumbrances of this world shall be…until then we carry them with courage and Hope, thank God for His mercy and this gift.
It may be the case that pro-life and anti-abortion are synonymous but I would contend that it shouldn’t be. I think pro-life should be a broad, literal term. If one wants to wear the title of “pro-life” then I think that he or she should do as consistently as possible. It seems to me that there is a lack of understanding or a certain duplicity in someone that is adamantly anti-abortion but gives no regard to his or her own life by abusing any substance (tobacco, drugs, alcohol, or food) or giving due attention to the physical and socio-economic environmental issues that diminish life, totally or in part.
I do feel, however, if there is a flaw to be found in my idealism it is in the subject that Justin presented. How pro-life should we be? To what lengths are we to go protect, preserve, or extend life? Should we go this far (link via Dan)? Where do we draw the line? Tough questions.
Ted, do you realize that you agreed with Ian before you disagreed with him? Ironic, huh?
But I do agree that all efforts made to be pro-life without Christ are lacking.
Aaron-
Since I place most instances of abortion and stem cell research in the larger category of murder, I don?t find my comment to Ian ironic. What I do find ironic is the thought that a consistent, non-duplicitous pro-life view would give the same weight to all of the items on your list.
I?m sure that God cares about every item on this list, but the Lord seems to have special love, care, and involvement in children and their development. For many Christians who voted for Kerry, the concerns on issues of life seem to be prioritized on matters of war, along with the quality of life for all post birth. For me, these concerns are important, but placing them above the murder of unborn children seems inconsistent with the implied prioritization of values in scripture.
A while back I was arguing pacifism with Nathan. As passionate as he was about issues of war and his disagreement with the Bush administration in general, his pro-life values gave him great pause on whether to support Kerry. I?m sure you?d approve of his pro-life consistency, but I applaud his pro-life priorities. http://littlefights.blogspot.com/2004/11/100000.html#comments
Ted, one comment and one question.
I’m not (intentionally) advocating that all items on that list should have equal weight. I am saying that they should all have some weight. It has been my experience that pro-lifers will latch onto abortion at the expence of all other issues that affect life. I don’t believe that should be so.
You said: “the Lord seems to have special love, care, and involvement in children and their development.” and “For me, these concerns are important, but placing them above the murder of unborn children seems inconsistent with the implied prioritization of values in scripture.”
I’m not aware of any scriptures that increase or decrease the value of a human life based on age. I’m curious how you came to these conclusions. Can you explain?
Aaron-
I?m glad, then, that you don?t think that all the items deserve equal weight. Since abortion is such a major issue for both sides, it may seem that people on either side are latching on to it at the expense of everything else, but I don?t think there are really any one-issue voters. However, the importance of the issue, whether one?s values center on the protection of personal rights or the protection of life, can make other issues pale in comparison. This may be sad, but I don?t think it?s necessarily wrong.
?I?m not aware of any scriptures that increase or decrease the value of a human life based on age,? either, Aaron. Even mere mortals can have a special priority on the lives of their own children without devaluing the lives of others. I can give you a couple of scriptures, and though I?m big on people having support for their arguments, I can?t fully support this one rationally. Once, someone asked Louis Armstrong what ?swing? is. He said, ?Man, if you have to ask me, you ain?t never gonna know.? Another example is the saying that if you have to ask the price (especially in a fancy restaurant with no prices on the menu) you can?t afford it.
What I?m saying is not that you?re never going to know (or that you can?t afford it), but that this information is best sought out by personal, experiential discovery. If you seek indications of God?s priorities as you read, pray, and learn, you?ll find them. However, reasonable ideas of equity from a human standpoint will always support your current thinking on these matters.
(Psa 139:13-16 NIV) For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother’s womb. {14} I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; your works are wonderful, I know that full well. {15} My frame was not hidden from you when I was made in the secret place. When I was woven together in the depths of the earth, {16} your eyes saw my unformed body. All the days ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to be.
(Mark 10:13-16 NIV) People were bringing little children to Jesus to have him touch them, but the disciples rebuked them. {14} When Jesus saw this, he was indignant. He said to them, “Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these. {15} I tell you the truth, anyone who will not receive the kingdom of God like a little child will never enter it.” {16} And he took the children in his arms, put his hands on them and blessed them.
(Mat 18:1-6 NIV) At that time the disciples came to Jesus and asked, “Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?” {2} He called a little child and had him stand among them. {3} And he said: “I tell you the truth, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. {4} Therefore, whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. {5} “And whoever welcomes a little child like this in my name welcomes me. {6} But if anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a large millstone hung around his neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea.