«

»

Mar 04

Your Life in My Driveway, etc.

Your Life in My Driveway

If, for some reason, somebody bound and gagged you and then laid you across my driveway, would ownership of my own property give me the right to run you over?

A foolish question indeed. Your right to be unbattered supersedes the normal exercise of my rights of ownership. But I could just untie you and then I can be on my way…

What if with some amazing feat of technology, someone made it so you would explode if you were removed from my driveway before a year had expired… how long would I have to put up with the infringement of my rights of ownership? Would I have to allow for further intrusion based on your need for food and care?

More foolish questions! Your right to live would definitely supersede the normal exercise of my rights of ownership. So just make a second driveway to access the garage.

What if instead of being vitally connected to my driveway, you were vitally connected to my body – in 9 months you can be separated, but until then, you will die if you move away or disconnect from my body…. Should my right to move freely and freely associate be more important than your right to live?

This is all silly. The answers are all obvious. It is not your fault you are connected to my driveway or to me. And I should not turn my back on your life because of my various less important rights. Sure, I should let you live, but must I let you be vitally connected to my body?

Then suppose instead that I personally took the steps to make you utterly dependent for your survival upon me and my body. I chose to get you into that position… then am I morally obligated to see it through to the end… and let you survive? What if I made you dependent on me with the help of someone else? Is my right to my body enough to let you die in that circumstance?

The implications to the question of abortion are obvious and immediate.

Fetal Humanity vs. Fetal Personhood

A fetus is every bit as human as you are. In fact, as soon as fertilization is complete, the genetic signature of that embryonic creature declares its humanity. The DNA also clearly demonstrates that the fetus is a different human individual than either of his or her parents – an embryo is a unique human being. (Neither a zygote nor a sloughed off human cell can be said to be a unique human, although each has the potential of becoming – through fertilization or through cloning.)

A fetus is every bit as alive as you are, and killing a fetus is killing a unique human being.

A fetus is every bit as much a person as you are, unless someone decides that it is more convenient to define this particular set of humans as less than a person. Certainly there are numerous examples of this in history, although most who define a fetus as less than a person would prefer not to be associated with Nazis (like Hitler) who dehumanized Jews or other racists (like Margaret Sanger) who selectively targeted humans with darker colored skin as less desirable members of the human race. People are killed for many different reasons, and some of them may even be just and appropriate reasons, but if we dehumanize the target human so that the reason for destruction can be as significant or as insignificant as an individual chooses, and so that a single individual renders verdict on a human’s life or death without hope of appeal, we surely cannot conclude that we are just.

Does a fetus need to have thoughts or emotions to be worthy of human protection? Ask someone who’s been in a coma for 9 months and lived to tell about it. Is someone in a coma a “potential human”?

Does a fetus need to be independently able to survive to deserve human protection? Ask anyone with a medical condition that made him dependent on someone else for 9 months. Is a paraplegic a “potential human”?

If I were temporarily implanted into an obese man’s excess, would I cease being human and become a “potential human”? An obnoxious mental picture, but one that makes the question of location a silly one.

Does the existence of the necessity of triage under certain circumstances dehumanize every person in every situation? Of course not, so neither should the rare necessity of triage requiring the life of the fetus instead of his mother.

The strong, the influential, the rich, and the powerful all have ways to protect themselves. True justice should defend the weakest humans against the strong. The truest injustice is for the powerful judge to protect the right of the influential and strong human to kill the defenseless one.

But What About Choice?

But what about the choice of a woman? Certainly, the scenarios above have their clear judgment. But a woman does have a choice! She can decide whether or not to engage in sex.

By the time a woman is pregnant, she has made her choice.

You see, choices do have consequences. Do we have the right to choose both a choice and the negation of the consequences of that choice?

I know that this concept is lost on many of our day, but choices do and even justly should have consequences.

One of the consequences of engaging in sex is that you might get pregnant. If you don’t want that consequence, then don’t engage in sex. This is simple, but apparently too complicated for the liberals among us. Certainly, many of us make choices that have undesirable consequences, but we all need to begin to take responsibility for our choices and their consequences, intended or otherwise. This includes justly taking responsibility for the decision to be sexually active and its consequences.

7 comments

Skip to comment form

  1. Andrew King

    Our society breeds such intense selfishness that not only life, but every other aspect in and around life, is “taught” and encouraged, almost required, to be completely self-centered. Under the guise of “freedom”, and “rights”, the way of life our country (and some of our world) has fallen into is completely COUNTER-productive to life itself, especially as Father would have it. (Sadly, many “Christians” are hip-deep in this way of thinking.) Bless you George for your wonderful service to our Father! See you soon! Cousin Andy

    1. Rogelio

      Two years ago, I lost a baby in the womb at 35 weeks. I know the anxiety of hivnag to deliver a baby who is not perfect. We never knew what caused our baby’s death, only God knows. The baby, a boy, was fully formed and looked perfect in every way. The heartache and trauma of this loss were huge. It was the hardest thing I have ever had to experience in my life. I am so happy for you that, in spite of the odds, you are getting to develop a relationship with your daughter. There is no price that can be put on that. When I held my lifeless baby, fresh from the womb, I was heartsick at the thought I’d never hear him cry or make little baby noises. I would never get to see him with his eyes open. I would never get to know him and who God created him to be. So, do cherish, cherish, cherish every living, breathing moment with your daughter. Even if the days are few, they are invaluable. You are doing the right thing by taking lots of photos. When our baby was born, the hospital provided a photographer to us free of charge. It was awkward hivnag this stranger in the room with us taking photos of our blue, floppy baby. However, the treasure of photographs he gifted us with is priceless. I keep a small album of them in my purse and pull it out anytime I want to. I was so afraid I’d forget our sweet son’s face, but now I never will. God’s very best to your family and your sweet precious gift.

  2. George

    The deceiver is such a jerk… and so deceiving! His purpose is to trick people into self-centered life — they think this will please themselves — he knows how destructive it will be.

    Christians can be deceived too. Many have bought one of the enemy’s most diabolical lies — the one about our as yet unborn children. God’s perspective is so clear in the following Scripture:

    Psalms 139:16 NASB Your eyes have seen my unformed substance; And in Your book were all written The days that were ordained for me, When as yet there was not one of them.

    Clearly David has revelation about the amazing love of the Father even for those who are not yet born! Reading the rest of that chapter, and numerous others concerning the not-yet-born, it is clear that the authors were there themselves, and with God.

    The biggest issue, however, that your comment brings up is this: in our “Christianity” do we really know God? Our Daddy is not equivocal in the matters of life… do we know Him at all? We just need a real relationship with a real Daddy, and He will tell us His heart for our precious children.

    1. Bing

      those things hppeenad. Not based on anything they have experienced (apart from feelings of security, guilt, love, forgiveness or peace while celebrating this lifestyle). This to me is strange. It’s strange to base your entire life on something that was written thousands of years ago by people that were far less informed than we are today. So, in essence I wasn’t trying to change the subject of the post. I was trying to go beyond the idea of how grammar can emulate the essence of the Man-God idea. I wanted to go to the heart of the faith issue that has enabled people to believe in such a thing as a need for a savior and the person that is doing the saving. Maybe I’m just splitting hairs now, as it’s clear I wasn’t discussing what was actually posted on this page but religion/faith in general. I had hoped that you wouldn’t take my attack on Christianity and the ideas you had discussed as an attack on you. I even went as far to say, I have no reason to assume I know you or your intentions at all, but I can say how your post came across. In my opinion your post was arrogant, sadistic and extremely immoral. I guess you find it difficult to separate the blog from the blogger. I do not. So, let me reiterate what I said in a way that doesn’t allow for any misinterpretations: The ideas you refer to in your blog (i.e. justice for sinners, need for salvation, etc.) are offensive to me because I do not recognize the source of these ideas as credible. Also, I find it strange how flippant most Christian’s tone comes across when they speak of eternal torment for sinners, you included. This leads me to believe there is almost some required level of arrogance involved with this terribly immoral and sadistic view of humanity’s fate. I do not know you at all, and if this is sounds like a personal attack I want to apologize in advance. I can’t say enough how much I appreciate intelligent people taking the time to thoughtfully address issues. That’s what I meant. Sorry if it came across different. I have a few questions for you to answer, if you don’t mind.1) If any part of the bible is wrong, how can you trust it? Who determines what is to be taken as literal and what is to be thought of as a metaphor? 2) Why should I take moral lessons from a book full of ethnic cleansing (Israelites taking the promised land ), child abuse (Deuteronomy’s charge to stone your disobedient children), disdain for the future of the human race (cries for Even so come quickly Lord Jesus therefore ushering in the end of days and the end of non-Christian humanity), praise for murder and willingness to commit murder (the Psalms and Abraham and Isaac), and clear misunderstandings about science and the world we live in? I had typed here that I wasn’t sure why the faithful find it necessary to point out what’s wrong with the world, themselves and others; but that’s a lie. I know why, it’s the bible’s message: The world needs a savior and Jesus is the man for the job. I do not think that there is something naturally wrong with me that needs supernatural correction. Actually, life is pretty good. I do not intend to just give up and quit fighting and rebelling , as this is my nature. I can not take these things at face value as they are far too important. I refuse to bend reality to fit a wonderfully elaborate fantasy. Simply put: I choose not to believe in God, especially as represented in the bible. If he takes issue with that then I have to wonder why he made me this way. I look forward to your response, if you choose to continue this.Jonathan[]

  3. Andrew King

    Our challenge remains to hear and recognize the direction of Him…with so many different (and sometimes very powerful) directions to be pulled, in my own life, I find the necessity for complete concentration, brought about by solitude and quiet time. Which, consequently, can be a difficult choice to make during these busy days we live in! When we truly HEAR His direction, the only truth, it becomes a “no-brainer” as we reflect to the past. Our challenge is to see it for our future and act on it.

    Which brings up the question of perception…our society encourages individuality, even in so-called “truth”, as though each individual has to determine what is “true” for them???? God’s truth, the only truth, is a constant- our perception of His truth is what is variable, and open to persuasion as humans. It’s only when we acknowledge our fluidity that we can focus on finding His truth, our direction, and as such grow in relationship to know Him. Sounds easy, right? Right….

    1. Pilly

      God is so kind! He will warn us of the consequences of our cheicos, but too often, like the people of Israel in Samuel’s day, we will make our cheicos in spite of His warnings. Much heartache can ensue, even for generations to come. Samuel warned them that having a king would be oppressive. May the Lord grant us hearts that are anxious to do things HIS way!

  4. Jessika

    and as you formulate your ropesnse (if you choose to do so). I have no reason to assume I know you or your intentions at all, but I can say how your post came across. In my opinion your post was arrogant, sadistic and extremely immoral. The assumption of original sin is beyond me. Allow me to break it down in non-biblical terms (it might sound different): The world was created by him . He gave one couple (the very first couple) the option to eat a certain kind of fruit that gave the mystical and yet unattained power of knowing the difference between good and bad. This knowledge would ruin everything for everyone, but this critical piece of information isn’t exactly shared as part of the warning. A sneaky snake is able to entice this first family into breaking their agreement and eating this naughty fruit. Now we can welcome the biggest change in the history of the world. For this one action, this one bite of bad fruit changes everything that was created good into something bad. Now that everything is evil and sinful, we (the created beings) should be given some sort of upgrade to combat these inherently sinful desires that were installed at the very beginning, right? No. We are told that these desires that are part of our biological/psychological make-up are the very catalysts to eternal torture because the first family chose the wrong snack in the greatest garden of all time after the talking snake had convinced them to. Now we have this wonderful choice (or free will ): We can either believe that these desires we were created with had everything to do with a terribly gruesome human sacrifice a couple thousand years ago and plead for forgiveness through that murdered innocent individual in order that we might be chosen to be forgiven for being born this way; or we can be tortured for a ridiculously longer period of time than we were actually alive in this sinful state (that we were unwillingly, unknowingly, forcefully thrust into). If we are lucky enough to be chosen, then we have the good fortune of having the resurrected dead man as an advocate, a heavenly lawyer that continually pleads our case to the creator so that he doesn’t act on his overwhelming urge to kill us on the spot for being exactly how he made us. Not only that, we also get this much needed upgrade (of course after we choose to accept that our initial created state was worthless and nothing good could have happened from this state). This upgrade consists of a spirit splashing all over our spirit like a creek or river would splash all over a kid. Then after this spirit has completely soaked our spirit we are able to share this mortal body with it. This spirit lives inside of us, and we are finally able to confront these wicked desires head on and we have the courage to tell others all about the good news. Forgive me for being so callous, but this is not good news . This message is so awful, and silly, on so many levels that it amazes me every time I find someone intelligently discussing it. This isn’t love, this message of redemption . This is the worst kind of slavery, the kind you have to willingly walk into. This is the worst bondage that mankind has ever known, the kind that has captivated entire nations and some of the most brilliant minds with its message of guilt and forgiveness. If God is real, something none of us can ever hope to prove in this lifetime , is this really the best plan for redemption he could muster? Why does it appear to be so similar to the other religions that were popular during and before its inception? This story, the message of the cross, isn’t just foolishness to those that are perishing ; it’s morally offensive on every human level.[]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>