MWR : Two abortion issues

Last updated November 24.

Send letters to the editor, or suggestions for our stories or Web site, to MWR‘s editors.

Feb. 23, 2009 issue

Two abortion issues

By Emil Kreider Harrisonburg, Va.

The Feb. 9 editorial, “Abortion and Openness,” calls for open discussion of abortion. Part of that discussion might include dividing the matter into two issues: 1) When and if the killing of other humans is justified; and 2) When human life begins. The second is much more difficult for most of us.

Most Mennonites agree killing is wrong, although a minority would make exceptions. The Bible is explicit that killing should not be done.

Many Mennonites believe human life begins at conception, and that is the position of the 2003 Mennonite Church USA statement on abortion. The Bible does not address when human life begins.

Regardless of how one interprets the Bible, the second issue has to be decided by our understanding of science and by the use of logic and evidence, in the context of our ethics. One defensible position is that human life begins at conception. Another is that it begins at viability. Another is that life begins when there is a functioning brain. Still another is that life begins before conception. Obviously, the process is a continuum that begins before conception and ends with birth.

While my own opinion differs from the 2003 statement, I would not claim I am right and the statement is wrong. Rather, I believe any specific choice made along a continuum is difficult to be dogmatic about. The existence of this continuum calls for humility and tolerance and the willingness to listen to reasons for the positions held. It could also lead to an exchange of views concerning the implications of these positions. For example, if abortion is the killing of human life, should women who have abortions be punished, and if so, how? What we get instead are dogmatic statements that “we’re right” from both anti-abortion and pro-choice people, little discussion of the problems created by any position, and more heat than light.

Comments

Nowhere in the article is scripture provided to support the writer's position. At the point of conception, all DNA is immediately imbedded in the unique new life that begins to grow in the womb. That to me is indisputable evidence of when life begins and that is not above my pay grade.

The conception of life in the womb is a one time event. The use of the word continuum by the writer suggests the baby evolves for a certain number of weeks in the womb and at a certain time in this process, it becomes a viable human being. Where would I find anything in the Bible that would support that? Further, if not from Scripture, from where and when did that idea come?

It appears the writer's use of the term viability has been misconstrued to refer to sustaining life by artificial means. The truth is the unborn child is "viable" from the point of conception if you leave the child alone in the sanctuary of the womb designed by God for the child's protection and development. Tearing the growing child from that protected sanctuary is a desecration of the child's natural viability.

The willful killing of a birthed baby one week old by whomever is guilty of murder. Should not the violent killing of a baby partially born be considered murder? Should not the violent killing of a baby in the final month of pregnancy be considered murder punishable by the same murder laws on a one week old baby?

Regarding the question of punishment, any abortion provider should be subject to the laws of murder. If a mother gives consent to the killing of the unborn or she hires a professional to do the killing, she also should be subject to the laws of murder. Murder laws should be designed to protect human life in the womb and outside the womb. Since Roe vs. Wade, 50 million living unborn have been violently killed. How much more evidence is needed to convince people that weapons of mass destruction exist in the abortion clinics of our country. How different is our wicked abortion practice than the heathen worship of their gods by sacrificing certain of their newborns in a fire?

The writer of this MWR article also neglected to address the guilt and depression some mothers experience after the abortion is finalized. The following is a quote from a pastor who has several women in the church who had one or more abortions prior to them accepting Jesus as their personal Saviour and being forgiven. "Very few people have any idea of the guilt, shame and condemnation these women lived with prior to their salvation. They were guilty of murder, they knew it and it didn't matter what anyone told them. These women had mental flashbacks, woke up hearing their baby crying and tormenting dreams. The only release these women have found is through repentance and renouncing every aspect of this sin of murder".

I make no apologies for being dogmatic about what the Bible and science teach on this issue. I submit the following scriptures Ex. 21:23, Jer. 1:5, Luke 1:15 & 41. In addition, I suggest doing a Bible word search on the word 'womb". There are 69 verses in www.biblelookup.com

- A. Dale Welty (feb 22 at 6:10 p.m.)
Human life, like canine and feline life, begins at the moment of fertilization. This is a scientific certainty. Whether or not a creature belongs to the human species or some other species is not a value judgement, it is a matter of biological categorization. If we as pacifists believe it is always wrong to take a human life, we must never kill an unborn member of the homo sapiens species for any reason under any circumstances. Therefore we need to support laws that will prevent unborn children from being killed. There is no reason for our laws to respect the views of delusional people who aren't aware of the scientic certainty that life begins at fertilization.

- Jerry C. Stanaway (feb 25 at 11:00 a.m.)

Comment on the article Two abortion issues

The purpose of comments is to engage in dialogue. We expect commenters to treat authors and each other as each would want to be treated. Respectful criticism is welcomed; offensive comments or parts of comments will be removed by the site administrator. Name and comment will be posted; email address is for follow-up only and will not be made public.