When David fled from King Saul, he passionately declared to Jonathan that there was but one step between himself and death (1 Sam. 20:3). David no doubt would have liked to have been many steps far removed from such a possibility. All he could do was that which was right in the sight of the Lord, one step at a time. Sadly, there are many in our land who are but one step from death. The problem lies in the fact that they are helpless as their fate, in human terms, rests in the hands of their uncaring mothers and a pleasure-seeking culture.
The State.com reports that “women seeking abortions would have to see a fetal ultrasound before the procedure under a bill given key approval in the S.C. House Wednesday. After three hours of passionate debate, the House voted 91-23 to require women to sign a statement swearing they had seen an ultrasound image of their fetus before getting an abortion.” Let the debate begin as we make a few points.
First, the question has been raised as to whether or not it is constitutional to require a woman to view an ultrasound prior to getting an abortion. Because the Declaration of Independence, the U.S. Constitution, and the principles upon which this country was built include an affirmation that the people have certain unalienable rights granted to them by God (not the State) and among those are the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, the measure is certainly constitutional and those who would assert otherwise are engaging in not only a serious deconstruction of the document but of history as well. The reality is that Roe v. Wade is unconstitutional and abortion should be outlawed.
Second, in light of principles of limited government and liberty for the people, should Christians and/or other U.S. citizens be in favor of requiring a woman to view an ultrasound prior to having an abortion? While civil liberties must be fervently guarded, one’s liberty ends where the next person’s liberty begins. Because the role of government in a civil society is to protect the citizenry from predators, that is, from one another, any measure that would protect human life is to be desired. Again, while the abolition of Roe is preferable, the mentioned requirement will save some and is therefore a step in the right direction in the continuing fight to rid the land of this blight.
Third, “opponents called the bill ‘emotional blackmail.’” Such an idea is as absurd as it is hypocritical. Long have women been told that the living baby in their womb is nothing but a glob of tissue. That living baby not only has a right to life, but, a woman should be as informed as possible when life hangs in the balance. The real issue is just that: information. With regard to emotion, it is her future emotional well-being that is on the line as well. Emotion should play a role in such a decision. To eliminate emotion from the equation is to objectify a human being and relegate that human being to the position of animal, worthless, or worse. As the Jews in Nazi Germany were so objectified, such talk is truly Hitlarian.
Fourth, “Rep. Todd Rutherford (D-Richland), railed against Republicans for opposing his amendment to exempt victims of rape and incest from the required ultrasound viewing. ‘Forcing a victim of a crime to see the results is tantamount to forcing her to relive the ordeal,’ Rutherford said. ‘You all are doing it to her once again.’” This argument too is absurd. Such arguments are only marshaled to confuse the uninformed and undiscerning. And, again, such arguments are hypocritical. If we followed the particular logic in question we would never have a woman testify against a rapist or sex offender. At the same time, a woman becomes worse than her offenders if she carries out murder. The real question is how putting an innocent human being to death because something tragic happened to someone else can be justified.
Fifth, there are some pro-life advocates who are concerned that passing this bill will in fact prolong the abortion scourge. While that concern is valid, not only must this bill pass in the Senate, but, this bill must cause us to increase our vigilance, not reduce it, as more women will know beyond any doubt what they are about to do. The Columbia Christians for Life are right in saying that “God’s requirement in the case of murder is justice, not regulation.” However, we believe that as more women are confronted and truly know what the issue is by viewing that baby in the womb, the more people will speak out that this curse might be removed from our land. Let us take this step. As we do, perhaps millions of unborn babies will take one step closer to life.
Sign up free for "Christian News and Views," a weekly e-mail newsletter highlighting relevant news stories affecting Christians. An editorial by Dr. Dean is included as well as a link to his comments on selected stories. The e-newsletter goes out each Friday and is sponsored by "Calling for Truth," a daily, live, call-in radio program co-hosted by Dr. Dean and Kevin Boling. Simply e-mail us at email@example.com to receive your first issue this Friday.
To listen live to "Calling for Truth" each day from 1:00 pm to 2:00 pm eastern time, go to www.callingfortruth.org and click on the "Listen Online" button. You may listen to archived shows as well. They are uploaded each day after the broadcast.
Have something to say about this article? Leave your comment via Facebook below!
Recently by Paul Dean
- Auburn Announcer Giving Credit Where DueThursday, December 05, 2013
- You Have to Know Why You PrayWednesday, November 27, 2013
- Social Justice, the Circus, and Programming Away the GospelWednesday, November 20, 2013
- What about Churched Harry and Mary (and Discipleship)?Monday, November 18, 2013
- I Get Goosebumps When I Think of Government TransformationThursday, November 14, 2013
Recently on Crosswalk Blogs
Add Crosswalk.com content to your siteBrowse available content