John Kasich Vetoes “Heartbeat” Abortion Bill

John Kasich Vetoes “Heartbeat” Abortion Bill December 14, 2016

Just recently, Ohio legislature moved to pass an abortion ban after the period of six weeks. The bill sat at the hands of John Kasich, who effectively had ten days to sign the bill. Yet Kasich vetoed the heartbeat bill.

The Germans have a word for it: schadenfreude.

Quite simply, it involves deriving pleasure from another’s misfortune. Incidentally, I do believe, contrary to popular sentiment, that many truly derive a sense of pleasure over the misfortune of those within the womb. To be sure – many struggle through the decision to abort; some even still are coerced into terminating the life of their unborn child. Yet many simply see this as a means to continue their lives carte blanche. Children, after all, are a [sic] terrible burden on one’s career and personal life. Statistically, the argument for “what if the woman was raped?” or “what if it happens out of incest?” simply don’t hold up in the long run. They play a marginal role, at best, in the staggering amount of abortions performed readily across the country.

The tenuous arguments for abortion hang on the very definition of an infant being inhuman – yet interestingly, no one debates the humanity of an infant when they desire to keep him or her or when the pregnant mother and her unborn child die in an automobile accident (even if she was not privy to the pregnancy, the guilty will be charged with double-homicide). The time humanity comes into question is when one must grapple with the quality of their life post-birth. Or perhaps, the time humanity comes into question is simply due to a rationalization under-girded by a disposition that hates the good gifts that God has given through common grace to all mankind because they hate the Giver of such gifts.

Yet might I suggest that what makes us human, beyond the work that God has done in fashioning mankind, is the common bond one finds in an expression of morality and ethics? This is what in particular sets humans apart from any other species in the animal kingdom. Many animals are highly intelligent and have an ability to not only utilize tools, but also actually fashion them. The inherent difference then, is that even the least intelligent of humans has an uncanny ability to function both on a cognitive and ethical level beyond that of any animal on earth. There is a remarkable difference and seldom do people stop to think of such a thing.

What I mean by this is that humans are not driven by animal instinct. There is an intrinsic sense of right and wrong – even if one’s sense of right and wrong is malfunctioning to the detriment of themselves and society. An unethical position is still derived from a sense of ethics – it is simply wicked and a poor use of the faculties granted to formulate truly ethical principles. What this plainly means is that human beings are not only able to function on a moral level – but by their own ability to do so, they do so by default. It is simply part of the way with which they operate because they are born with the predisposition to rationalize and philosophize about the nature of morality and ethics and specifically, how they can govern their constituents by this same natural principle. This is all born out of the idea of the Imago Dei, which is quite simply the image of God stamped on humanity – as it sets them apart in their function and purpose in every specific instance of their lives so that they are intrinsically a moral people.

Yet when metaphysics and ethics enter the debate on legislature, the hairs on one’s neck start to bristle and the clenching of teeth commences. Invariably, we all recognize someone loses out on certain rights; one person won’t be able to operate in the full freedom they desire. That’s precisely how laws work; restriction and constraint are natural guidelines flowing from an objective ethical framework – yet when that ethical framework is altogether abandoned or marginalized for another, subjective ethical framework, well, everyone does what is right in their own eyes and this precise sentiment becomes the mantra for legislature, hence why we have been under the yoke of Roe v. Wade since 1973.

Surely, there is work yet to be done across the country, as the hope is for abolition of the practice in entirety rather than simply an abortion ban on all under six weeks. Don’t get me wrong – I am grateful for any progress made against abortion, but it will never be enough until the practice is entirely abolished. Yet if I am to be honest – I have doubts I will see that day. If it were not for Christ and His glorious gospel I would be a hopeless man, especially in this situation. I have had little confidence in the government since I’ve been cognizant of the government – and that confidence has plummeted further after coming to faith in Christ. Simply stated, I don’t put my faith in men like John Kasich and while I was disappointed at the cowardice he displayed, I was not shocked. Many within the political realm don’t realize the end goal because they’ve fashioned idols out of the very system they are to serve the people through.

The goal is not merely settling for minor political action by Governer Kasich in signing a ban that allows for mothers to kill their children – but that the practice of abortion itself is barbarically torn up into tiny little pieces by medical forceps, sucked up with a vacuum, and discarded into the trash heap. Think my description is too visceral? Well, perhaps it may conjure unwanted images that affect the raw emotions tied to the practice of abortion – but the sad reality is that such a depiction must be part and parcel to the discussion on abortion.

Yet that visceral reaction causes one to operate on an ethical, moral, and logical framework due to the conjuring of words upon an electronic screen. Though the screen obscures my personhood – it has still caused a reaction only possible through that of a human being. Let’s borrow this momentary reaction and now take it front and center to the humanity of the child in the womb, who though perhaps obscured due to the faceless nature of a sonogram and liberal rhetoric, is still a human being, on all scientific, rationalistic, empathetic, religious, and yes, even non-religious grounds. Many an atheist recognize the barbarism that is abortion.

We all know what goes on behind the curtain. There is no magical wizard in the land of Oz. There is simply a human capable of great evil going to another human being who is likewise capable of great evil, procuring a service of great evil. Let’s please stop pretending there is some sense of nobility to the act of abortion. Autonomy and unbridled freedom in the slaughter of infants is not a thing to celebrate as noble and ethical. It may be derived from an ethical system – but it is clearly a defunct ethical system and one that ought to be discarded for another which doesn’t propose the slaughter of the innocent.

""Objective science overwhelmingly demonstrates that a fetus is a fully human – more than that, ..."

How One Texas Town Went From ..."
"“Even atheists, by their own self-admission, are going out of the way to classify themselves ..."

‘I Don’t Need Theology, I Just ..."
"Good points. Yes, Romans 14:5 and other texts were not covered in the post."

When Church Is Optional, You Set ..."
"Thank you for the article. However, there is little to no meaningful exegesis and developing ..."

When Church Is Optional, You Set ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


TRENDING AT PATHEOS Evangelical
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • RustbeltRick

    The abortion rate has been trending downward at an impressive clip, and is now as low as it was in the years prior to Roe v. Wade.

  • Leyla1001nights

    If you want to reduce the abortion rate, you need to provide easy access to free/low cost birth control, medically accurate sex education, paid family leave, higher minimum wages and child care support. Otherwise, you are simply forced birth.
    Even in countries where abortion is illegal, they still happen.
    Pretty judgmental saying all abortions are for convenience. Have you bothered to ask women why they choose abortion?
    Why should a woman lose her civil rights because of a stray sperm?

    • calduncan

      No such thing as “stray sperm.”

      Women who behave themselves don’t get pregnant.
      I think most 4th graders understand it.

      • This does require the participation of sinful men as well.

      • Gregory Peterson

        Treating women like children is pretty calloused and sexist.

    • Hisprisoner

      There is no reason any woman should ever have an abortion under any circumstances. All birth control other than condoms and abstinence also kill human life.

      • Gregory Peterson

        Oh good grief. That’s disgusting in the extreme, and it is extreme.

        What smug, self righteous, deeply pathetic idolatry.

        I don’t see how other forms of contraception “kills human life” any more than a condom. Something doesn’t happen, like zygotes. What is so sacred about a microscopic dot which can split into two or three zygotes? We are not talking about persons, and given the miscarriage rates at the earliest stages of pregnancy, perhaps could never be one someday, anyway?

        When it comes to killing “human life,” I kill millions and millions of pre-developmental pre-born human lives just while dreaming… millions and millions of potential girls and boys who will never live because even at my age, I can’t stop dreaming of…cue ominous Hammond organ chord in a minor key… sinful fornication!

        (In case you missed sex ed that day, or never had any, a woman’s egg doesn’t determine sex, even if it was often thought until the modern-era that a woman’s womb did. They thought that a defective womb only formed females.)

        • Hisprisoner

          Just because society has indoctrinated you to believe birth control is ok, doesn’t mean it is. Your lack of understanding about how birth control works really shows your ignorance.

          • Gregory Peterson

            Right… everyone is ignorant except you.

          • That’s an outrageous accusation!! Of course hes’ not the only one who’s not ignorant. I’m not ignorant either.

          • Hisprisoner

            Actually, I know many people, to include doctors, that know birth control kills a human life before it implants in the cervix.

          • Gregory Peterson

            Making women worship a microscopic dot because it may have a “Y” chromosome is idolatry and downright evil… yet that’s essentially what you are demanding.

            But then, conservative Christians specialize in self righteously demonstrating the doctrine of the utter depravity of man…and making “those people” suffer for conservative Christian’s self-privileging, patriarchal beliefs.

            The pill prevents ovulation. In the unlikely case that an egg was/is released, thickened mucus makes it more difficult for sperm cell to reach it. In the odd chance that one sperm cell does and fertilization happens, only then does the changes in the uterine lining makes implantation more difficult. Pregnancy doesn’t begin until implantation.

            Natural miscarriages in the earliest stages of pregnancy are common and a woman may not even have known that she was pregnant.

            Considering that the authors of the books of the Bible didn’t know about hormones, didn’t know about the sperm cells and the mammalian egg and therefore didn’t know when fertilization happened, didn’t know about the astronomical odds of any one of the millions of sperm cells and any one of the one to two million eggs that a woman is born with, didn’t know that life began eons ago and is continued in the various processes of procreation, didn’t know that there was anything microscopic at all… you can’t look to the Bible for legitimization of your bizarre, male supremacist, whitewashed white theology based authoritarian nonsense.

          • Hisprisoner

            The author of the bible created all things.

          • Gregory Peterson

            There are many authors of the Bible. That is a bibliolatrous doctrine.

          • Hisprisoner

            2 Corinthians 4:3-4 KJV
            [3] But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost: [4] In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.

          • Gregory Peterson

            That’s a smug, self-righteous, self-privileging response that within the context of the subject, makes it a wicked one, too.

    • Gilsongraybert

      Did you read where I didn’t indict everyone for saying it is done out of convenience..? Because I literally didn’t say that; I said that statistically, most abortions are done for this reason. It is a plain fact at this point to say the majority of abortions are performed for this reason, but I did not say every single one of them was done in this manner. Regardless, the question is not necessarily the reasons (though this is undoubtedly part of the conversation); the question is the morality behind it.

      • RustbeltRick

        Can you provide a source/link for those statistics? Thank you.

        • Gilsongraybert
          • RustbeltRick

            “Can’t afford baby now” seems to be the most frequent given reason for having an abortion. And data shows that a robust response to poverty does factor into a reduced abortion rate. But that is a point of disagreement in the pro-life community. Whole-life pro-lifers (Catholics, liberal evangelicals, etc.) support expanded food stamps and other aid to vulnerable mothers and children, but pro-lifers of the Tea Party/austerity approach usually win the day and propose continual cuts to the safety net. It would seem that a tilt toward the whole-life POV could position the pro-life movement as more consistent and compassionate.

          • Gilsongraybert

            If you read above I made mention already that there ought to be a shift of thinking on providing aid to those who need it. I feel a lot of conservatives would agree on that point as well – even though many would not. It also carries a lot more of a nuanced view to the fiscal aspect of things simply because our country would have to re-align much of what they spend in order to fund these incentives (which I think they should). My earnest wish is that people would not put the burden on the state, but give their own money to help. I know many do, but many more could.

            I give financially toward organizations that provide all sorts of aide (and we have donated countless things from our own household for the same purpose) for unwed, single mothers or fathers, or couples, without hesitation. The next step for my wife and I is adoption, which we are looking at trying to do within the next few years here. I think a drastic overhaul of the adoption system is also due.

          • Gregory Peterson

            Giving to private and religious charities for remediation of long standing structural, economic inequalities and political problems is just a ‘feel good’ excuse to avoid dealing with them. It’s pretty much about continuing with the status quo that likely as not, privileges one’s self more than it helps solve societal problems(though pressure from charities and the public can motivate governments into doing something substantive).

            Mind you, don’t stop giving to charities, but it would be better, I think, if economically stressed people didn’t have to depend upon sometimes also stressed, capricious and undependable charities for the basics of life.

            Run over here for a coat as winter is coming on, then go way across town for meal, which may include some clueless person sermonizing while the food goes cold, then go to some other part of town for a bed out of the cold… all the while without dependable means of transportation. That’s not charity, that’s cruelty.

            I would prefer that the government would at least see to it that basic needs are adequate for all, while I give to, say, the arts, which use to pay some of my bills. Even though it was a very modest side income, the arts have nevertheless greatly culturally, emotionally and intellectually enriched and enlarged my life, for which I’m very grateful. And I have both charity and government programs to thank for that.

            In times of economic stress, churches and private charities are also stressed as well. Not a good time for them to be the main source of basic food, clothing, health care and shelter needs.

  • Rachael

    I always go into a debate with compassion as my side. The act of abortion does not show compassion to the mother or the unborn child. I was a teen mom; life has been harder than it would have been had I chosen abortion. Many people tried to convince me it was the “right” choice, but you know deep down… it isn’t. I did make the right decision. My daughter has seen and is witnessing the journey which did not start with her being aborted. She sees her mother accomplishing goals, struggling, working on her masters, and loving her and life so much more because she’s in it. I can speak from the perspective of a woman who was a single mother of two and full-time college student. I had to give up party weekends, sororities, and “freedom,” but I gained wisdom, unconditional love, and humility. My mother was also a teen mom. I’m sure glad she didn’t abort me because I too got to see her accomplish goals, struggle, and work as a music minister and school teacher. I can’t help but know her life wouldn’t be what it is without me, and I know for a fact that my life would not be anything as spectacular as it is without my daughter. Abortion would have ruined this story — this legacy.

    • Things1to3

      Abortion access was the reason I decided to have my kid. Having another option besides suicide gave me the time and the space to find a better plan.

    • Gilsongraybert

      Praise God for that testimony! It is not an easy road, but one I hope you had some come along side you in. In either case, what a tremendous legacy indeed.

    • EtiennaD

      By the way your only argument here is that you had a choice and it turned out right for YOU.

      So abortion shouldn’t be available to other women? Just because of your ironically selfish idea of a legacy. Great. “Legacy”.Other women are not fixated in a “legacy “

      • Rachael

        I posted about my own personal experience, you’re right. Do you have a personal experience to share? Compassion is my only argument, if you even want to call it that. I don’t know what it’s like for a woman to go through an abortion, but I can’t imagine it’s a decision made flippantly or that the experience leaves a woman untouched by sadness; however, I do know what it’s like to choose to have children when the circumstances are not ideal, and how difficult that can be for a single mother, so that’s what I shared. Notice how I never condemned anyone for their own choices, but that doesn’t mean I can’t be grateful for being alive and having my daughter. Can you please explain how that qualifies as selfish?

  • Hisprisoner

    Awesome article Grayson! If you want to get involved in the abolition of abortion, check out this site:

    http://abolishhumanabortion.com/

    God bless you brother.

    • Gilsongraybert

      I am grateful for many who go to the clinics, but AHA seems to be a dangerous organization that eschews the necessary and proper ecclesial structure (i.e. the local church) and places burdens upon many as if they are not faithful Christians simply because they don’t do the exact same things many within the AHA movement do. There are many ways to fight this fight and I grow weary of much of the slander that takes place against others for not following the same methodology – though I am glad for those who fight to abolish abortion.

      • Hisprisoner

        I agree that aha uses radical practices to convey their message, but the apathy of the church during the greatest holocaust in history is disgusting. If two year olds were being slaughtered in every city, I guarantee every Christian in America would stand up to end it. Where the church, you and I, have failed, aha is exposing evil all over America.

        • Gilsongraybert

          See, I don’t find what they do in respect to open-air preaching, picketing, etc., shameful or bad in any sense (or even radical). The difficulty is simply in them eschewing church culpability – as well as saying everyone else who doesn’t do precisely what they do is disobedient and lazy. That simply isn’t true; there are people I know who are not part of AHA who give financially, who go and picket, who volunteer as crisis centers, who teach, who foster/adopt, etc. My point in all of this is that there are many ways to fight the battle and AHA hasn’t cornered the market on it. They feel they have, and often it results in them targeting the body in a very poor way. It is one thing to call the church to action – it is another altogether to abandon her and say she’s apostate because Christians can often be apathetic to some things which require action.

  • Jeff M

    I always ask (and never get an answer) my anti-abortion friends and family; so what is your proposed alternative? If we were at the bargaining table what do you propose we do instead of Roe v Wade? Just…make abortion illegal? Then what? What kind of illegal; civil or criminal? Who goes to jail? Orphanages are already full (as are the jails), so where do all these kids go? What’s your plan?

    • Gilsongraybert

      If it were up to me, yes, abortion would be illegal and persons in the womb would be afforded the full rights they are due. Carry that to its logical conclusion with punitive measures for both the one performing the abortion and the one procuring it. I would also suggest an overhaul on the adoption and foster process to make it much easier and financially cheaper for families/singles to adopt/foster, as well as an overhaul on financial aid for single mothers (or fathers) in the case of their conjugal partner abandoning responsibility. But a lot of this would necessitate more stringent qualifying measures to ensure not only the safety of the child, but a responsible use of such aid. I already give money to a pregnancy crisis center in my home town; I would have no problems whatsoever if it further affected my pocketbook through various taxes.

      I am also of the inclination to believe that the church should already be on the forefront of this endeavor, regardless of government action. I am in no financial position to be able to adopt, hence why I financially support those who do – or – crisis centers that provide aide to those in need. It is a holistic approach, not only limited to providing aide, but actually teaching fundamental concepts like how to parent well under a biblical framework. The difficulty in all of this is that common ideologies are not shared – but ultimately, if murder is murder, and it is, then ideologies can and should be hashed out individually and the overarching principles we ought to glean from this conversation are the practical measures we can instill. Unfortunately, many on both sides don’t like having their pocketbooks being hit and certain freedoms being lost. In the end, I feel it is completely worth it.

      • Jeff M

        Thanks so much for your reply! Though I would call myself pro-choice, I am horrified by the results of our society’s approach to this problem. I was once a community risk reduction person (Deputy Fire Chief) and life is precious to me. We talk about the 5 E’s in public safety: education, engineering, enforcement, economic incentives and (the failure of the first 4) emergency response. That encompasses the long term goals of cultural change to make a safer society. I have always thought that applying these principles to this issue could have a great impact and you have mentioned several ways to do just that. We could, if we put our minds and hearts to it, reduce the number of abortions drastically through such means.

        I don’t agree with the punitive approach; I think we would have as much luck with gun laws in reducing violence, but if we had made strides in other areas I would not reject it out of hand…reasonable people need to be willing to consider ALL options. You are clearly a man of both principles AND action and I love you for that. Like you, I feel the end result – every child being wanted and born into a society that values life – would be completely worth it. Again, my thanks and Merry Christmas to you and yours.

        • Gilsongraybert

          Merry Christmas to you and yours as well Jeff! Thank you for the kind dialogue, even though we disagree on some important things here!

        • Gregory Peterson

          Mr. Gilbert is indeed a man of principles and action. I find them cluelessly calloused, morally and intellectually deficient principles and actions, however.

          I also hope that every child will be born much wanted, cherished and loved, as I was many decades ago. But valuing life isn’t idolizing the early stages, especially, of pregnancy at the expense of those pregnant.

          As someone with a genetic disease which was a slow, very horrible, very painful way to die before Nobel Prize winning research came up with effective treatment, we need to think about if and when we should be merciful about the dying, too…which is so difficult to even think about.

          But this is the Christmas and Hanukkah season (my ever enlarging family is United Methodist, Jewish and Catholic). This will be an even more joyous couple of holidays for us this year as we welcome a new adult member into our family and holidays. We’re bringing many of us far flung selves to just one spot on the globe, too.

          Merry Christmas to you both, and also to your families and friends.

          • Gilsongraybert

            Gregory, I appreciate your ability to post simultaneously back-handed, yet vaguely complimentary comments – you’ll have to forgive me for not carrying on with all of your rhetoric. It is undoubtedly inflammatory, which I have no real issues with (it actually made me chuckle more than a few times) – I just don’t have the time to waste going back and forth, and it would indeed be a severe waste of time. In either case, good luck to you as you go on your way bombastically and infectiously calling others intellectually deficient. I hope one day you’ll come to learn that calling others by a myriad of insulting terms is not any way for you to further even the slightest point that you actually might have stumbled upon truth in. Obviously I am not saying you are even remotely correct in your assessment on abortion, but perhaps in another realm you might be a bit closer to home. Yet many people simply don’t have the time, energy and patience required to deal with dissecting through all of the various insults.

            Seriously, take a cue from Jeff above. We both were able to walk away, still firm in our convictions – yet neither one of us resulted in name calling, slander, etc., and then try and give well-wishes in the next breath.

          • Gregory Peterson

            However condescending your post is, your extreme, misogynistic language painting women who have had abortions as having commuted “infanticide” exposes your morally dubious motivations.

          • Gilsongraybert
          • Gregory Peterson

            Someday, you’ll grow up and maybe learn what it’s like to be a man instead of a priggish little bully with a “no girls allowed” sign on your make believe fundamentalist fort.

          • Gilsongraybert

            See above.

      • Raymond

        “Carry that to its logical conclusion with punitive measures for both the one performing the abortion and the one procuring it.”

        So if the father is not involved in the abortion, even though he was involved in the conception, he’s off the hook?

        • Gilsongraybert

          Not in the least, especially since he abdicated his rightful place as one who could potentially voice reason to NOT terminate a life. However, we still all see an inherit difference between one who chooses to murder and one who flees responsibility, however wicked and cowardly the latter might be. I don’t know what God’s judgment looks like in those respective scenario – yet it is a sure thing: the Lord is the avenger.

          • Raymond

            “we still all see an inherit difference between one who chooses to murder and one who flees responsibility, however wicked and cowardly the latter might be”

            Interesting. But the father’s support would be a resource for the mother to help her decide not to choose abortion. This is an important factor in some women’s decision. Does that impact his level of responsibility? And how does the lack of other factors (birth control, pre-natal care, support for young single mothers) that impact the choice of whether to have the procedure effect her responsibility?

          • Gregory Peterson

            So, you are calling women who have had an abortion procedure murderers, even though an embryo, which is the stage at which the great majority of abortions are done, hardly qualifies as a ‘person’ like you and me.

            My brain is not a neural tube. I can make decisions about my life, however foolish and ill advised some of them have turned out to be. I can signal to others that I’m distressed and need something, which even an infant can do (nice to know for my impending second childhood.)

            I’m not the size of lentil or my thumbnail. My very aged mother would have great difficulty carrying me around all of the time. Fortunately for her, my existence is much less constricted than that of an embryo, even with my bum leg.

      • EtiennaD

        Abortion has valid cases whether you like in or not.

        Even in later terms they do not have full rights because important rare exceptions has to always be considered.

        The issue of killing in gestation is a highly unique one. But I love how you self righteous control freaks like to portray this as anything similar to someone on some murder spree.

        Pregnancy takes place in a woman body. If you don’t think that this unique situation should involve some favor given to the woman, then you’re an extremist.

        • Gilsongraybert

          EtiennaD, did you just assume my gender?!?!?!!?

          • Gregory Peterson

            Unless you are a trans-man, which I somehow kind of doubt but correct me if I’m wrong, the goatee in your photo is usually regarded as a mark of the cisgender male, just as with my beard (That really is my aged head in my photo).

            Don’t make me email it to my archaeologist brother for further confirmation. He’s very busy at the moment.

            If it’s not your photo, then why are you using it? Are you a woman trying to internet pass as a man? Who, then, is that man in the photo?

    • JamieHaman

      As far as I can tell, there is no plan. Just a whole lot of pain and indifference to the suffering of others.
      Somehow the forced birthers seem to think that getting pregnant and having a baby will magically transform humans into responsible, reliable, loving parents.
      While that does happen, it doesn’t happen often enough. Just look at grade schools and prisons.

    • EtiennaD

      Their plan is to pat themselves on the back.

  • JamieHaman

    Children should be wanted, welcomed, and loved. Treasures, not punishments.

    • Gilsongraybert

      So if they are unwanted, unwelcomed, and unloved – they deserve to be treated as non-humans and discarded? That seems like a fairly paradoxical and subjective standard. By that logic, I am sure there are many who feel I would fit that category as an adult – would it be acceptable to kill me? If not, why not?

      • EtiennaD

        Black and white thinking isn’t fair to womem, children, or your society.

        • Gilsongraybert

          Speculative gradations used to determine killing infants isn’t fair to future women, current children, or our society.

          • Gregory Peterson

            Disgusting response. An abortion doesn’t “kill infants.” I can not hold and care for a six to 13 week embryo or fetus.

            You’re accusing women of infanticide. An infant is “post-born,” and if necessary, even my grandpa aged self can love it, hold it and care for it if the mother can’t. Not so with an embryo, the stage at which most abortions are done.

            You don’t treat an embryo like an infant because you simply can’t. You don’t treat a child like an adult because she isn’t one. You don’t treat me like a child, either.

            Like it or not, life usually doesn’t have sharp, clear, unalterable demarcations, even more so for us humans. But, the difference between a very tiny, unthinking embryo and an infant in my arms is about as clear as can be.

            For instance, we talk about the “moment” of conception, but life, then later the processes of mammalian procreation, began eons ago. And, that “moment” that we talk about was unknown to the people of the Bible. They didn’t know about sperm cells and the mammalian egg. They seemed to fuzzily think, kind of, that life began at the moment of ejaculation, as an ‘unformed’ child. If only man made the stuff of life, then that life that he made belonged to him… at least if he was a free man.

            What we think of as that “moment” of conception was only confirmed in the 1850’s, when my great grandfathers were teens, if memory of earlier research serves. (We’re given to late in life babies…ask my much younger brother about that.)

          • Gilsongraybert

            It is infanticide; how is this that difficult to understand? When you murder an infant, it is still murder – no matter how young.

          • Gregory Peterson

            An infant is a newborn, not a zygote, embryo or a fetus. Accusing people of infanticide when they’re for legal abortion procedures or have had an abortion, is, I would think, potentially libelous.

            Your abuse of the language for shameless emotional manipulation is disgusting, extreme and deeply calloused, which makes me wonder about your basic motivations…if you even know what really motivates you.

            It also reminds me of Milan Kundera’s passage in “The Unbearable Lightness of Being” on the authoritarian uses of kitsch. The form of kitsch of which he wrote is also a tool of shameless emotional manipulation for questionable purposes.

          • Hisprisoner

            Fetus means young child. You just defeated your own argument. You have to care for the infant. That infant will die if you don’t care for it. Ageism is worse than any other ism there is. And you are a perpetrator of it. Just like rape is taking advantage of someone weaker, abortion is taking the life of someone weaker and completely defenseless in the place they supposed to be the safest. May God destroy all the wicked from this land and heal our land.

          • Gregory Peterson

            A fetus is “an unborn or unhatched vertebrate especially after attaining the basic structural plan of its kind.” In humans, that begins about 8 weeks till birth. A fetus isn’t “someone,” but it is what it is.

            A young child is a young person who has been born.

            I have a genetic disease. I’ll die if I don’t have some care by others. However, I don’t depend upon any one person, and there are a great many other characteristics that make me different from a zygote, embryo or fetus.

            “May God destroy all the wicked from this land and heal our land.” As you have demonstrated that you would know what wickedness looks like.

    • Gizmo

      They are treasures.
      That’s why it’s wrong to kill them.

  • Gregory Peterson

    You don’t really know how to be moral, do you?

    The great majority of abortions happen in the first trimester. We are in no way talking about ‘infants.’ If you’ll say anything to emotionally manipulate people into conforming to your patriarchal religion…why shouldn’t I believe that you’re about preserving white male privilege?

    If you really were concerned about abortion, you would be demanding comprehensive sex ed, easily availability of contraception and condoms, affordable health care, paid family and sick leave policies, and working to reduce pockets of poverty that are machines to manufacture desperation.

    But no, you won’t put your money where your mouth is. You almost seem to like to think of women as cold blooded child murderers.

    It’s not all about you or me.

    • Gilsongraybert

      Gregory, you’ve bought hook, line, and sinker into the false ideology that propagates the idea that murder is acceptable, so long as there are other circumstances at play (along with plenty of others I see that were flippantly mentioned). I’ve literally put my money where my mouth is – and my bank records show this to be evident for unmarried mothers and their children. What steps have you taken, beyond that of keyboard warrior, to reduce the murder rate that is the abortion industry? Has it affected your pocketbook? If so, then there is simply the ideological shift to a proper, biblically informed morality, though to be sure this is no light feat. The gospel is for all, because all need Christ – yet that radically affects what we do in service and belief.

      • Gregory Peterson

        As I said and will expand upon…you apparently, and definitely self-righteously, like to think of women as natural born child killers who need your male Fundamentalist self to strictly control them for their own good.

        I’m not sure why you think that you have any moral authority over all women’s lives, other than maybe a tawdry sense of a divine entitlement to unearned male privilege and power.

        I’m old enough to remember the pre-Roe v Wade era, and it was the bad old days. I personally had a college classmate who likely died from an illegal abortion. Had abortion been safe and legal, she would probably be a doting grandmother today.

        But you would seem to prefer to think of her as a murderer. I think of her as having been killed by a sexist, bigoted country… a country you want to resurrect.

        • Gilsongraybert

          Yep, I think all women everywhere are “natural born child killers who need [my] Fundamentalist self to strictly control them for their own good.” You’ve read me like a book. Incidentally, this type of rhetoric is precisely the kind which truly fosters legitimate debate. Everyone who disagrees with me must be Hitler – or a sexist, bigoted, misogynistic, capital “F” Fundy who is not only self-righteous, but cognizant of their moral superiority (even though an abundance of statements conveniently ignored show otherwise) who simply want to exercise control over the masses by damning them and telling them how awful they are. Oh, and this is all due to their tawdry sense of divine entitlement brought on by White-privilege. Seriously guy, go get a thesaurus and come back with at least some variations to the cliche insults always lofted at those you disagree with.

          I had a response all typed out to actually try and debate the issue, because, I dunno, I feel there’s some sense of honor people are due simply by right of being human and perhaps one could be afforded that same respect – but why would I even remotely bother with someone as enlightened as yourself?

          In the end though, you seem quite keen on slander and name calling – so I’ll let you be. But I’m the closed-minded and intolerant one here.

          • Gregory Peterson

            I didn’t call you a ‘Hitler.” I very much doubt that you’re a raving anti-Semite and racist in charge of a major industrial country who wants to control all of Europe, make slaves of Slavs and make whole minority groups disappear forever.

            Alumni that I have met or read have themselves labeled Moody Bible Institute as a “Fundamentalist” Christian college. If it no longer is that, I’ll be happy to be corrected.

            You’re the one who is essentially saying what I wrote, however. You’re the one who doesn’t trust women to make difficult decisions about their lives and their futures. You’re the one trying to make a pretty safe chemical or medical procedure illegal, and therefore, unnecessarily delayed, unregulated, medically unsupervised, more dangerous and expensive.

            I’m all for reducing the numbers of abortions (or any medical procedure or drug usage) for that matter, but in a responsible way, which apparently isn’t the ‘conservative’ way. I’ve told you how to do it, too.

            This is America. There are always issues about white privilege, and when a ‘white” man such as ourselves tries to restrict others in their life decisions, tells them how they should live their lives and disparages them, even cluelessly and indirectly as you have, it should be noted.

            If you have encourage women who were going to have a safe, early abortion to not have one, you are indeed responsible for helping them with the dislocations in their lives, which they would have otherwise not experienced.

            You’re the one at a ‘conservative’ Christian Dispensationalist institute. At least until a few years ago, women were not allowed to write sermons, which was reserved for men, but were condescendingly allowed to write “messages” that men apparently need not heed nor respect.

            And of course, in my view as someone who has studied the Evangelical pro-slavery apologists and the anti-Civil Rights Movement backlash, ‘dispensationalism’ itself is a barely sublimated ethnic cleansing fantasy. Jesus’ glorious, born-again spiritual race, continuously bathed in all things of lightness, goes to that very exclusive, pearly gated community of many mansions. Meanwhile the inferior spiritual race, ruled by darkness, gets all hell thrown at them as punishment for not doing as the superior born-again race had told them to do…or else.

            If dispensationalism isn’t being taught anymore at Moody Bible Institute, except as part of American religious history, I do apologize and would much appreciate an authoritative correction.

  • James

    You’re like a poor man’s Mark driscoll. You have all the answers to life’s problems and are full of yourself. Take a look at his career and see where it leads.

  • Norbert Thomas

    Your argument is based on claims that cannot be substantiated and therefore should have no part of forming laws: that life is given to humans by a deity, that humans are made in God’s image, etc. You want the laws governing women’s bodies to be decided according to your personal religious beliefs. If you don’t believe in abortion, don’t get one. Don’t try impose your beliefs on everyone else.