You say Po – tay – to, and I say Po – tah – to. Who’s correct? You can inject humor into that debate all day long and end up agreeing that it’s up to the individual. What happens when you say tax me (and many others if not all) for something I, or we, find abhorrent to my/our, and/or my/our family’s, beliefs and well being? All of a sudden, we’re into a serious discussion about life changing events. Events that reduce my/our financial well being, health, freedom of movement/expression, ability to defend oneself etc. etc.
Keep in mind that all laws (taxes or otherwise) are legislated morality. It’s what your legislators (operating on the majority’s wishes) vote into law. Those in power – especially behind the scenes (the uber rich), have created numerous factions fighting each other in this and other countries. As long as we are fighting each other, the power mongers can move pieces on the chess board unnoticed.
Now, what is morality? Bottom line, morality is a belief in right and wrong and assigns either one’s status to all aspects of life. One of the hottest issues that’s been going on for nearly 50 years is the abortion issue, so let’s examine that one. From the extremes, you have those who believe life begins at conception, and those who believe that life begins when the baby is “viable” and out of the womb.
From an empirical (evidence based) viewpoint, conception is very clear from in utero fiber optic video recordings that, if you’ve never watched, are absolutely fascinating. Also, empirical evidence would demonstrate that a born baby cannot survive on its own until it is several years old. So, is there any middle ground? Those in favor of abortion have compromised on a variety of “middle grounds”. Through most of U.S. history since abortion became a “Constitutional right”, terminating the pregnancy (abortion) was curtailed after the first trimester unless there was a threat to the mother’s life at which point, the abortion could take place all the way up to the delivery date.
As is often the case, there have been people who chose not to honor that (the 30 days), or to lobby for looser legislation which has succeeded in some states. In some cases, the baby’s lives are terminated at birth while out of the womb, or just as it is passing through the birth canal which is characterized as “late term abortion”. Additionally, abortions are based upon a defect in the baby. After laying out, without prejudice or commentary, the current status of America’s abortion debate, it should be debated with some prejudice.
Is a conceived child (fetus – Latin for small child), a human life and deserving of protection? The Constitution is under assault and largely ignored any more, although, let’s consider for a moment what it says. “…all men are created equal…” All means every, no exception, 100% inclusive. Men is understood as all human beings – men and women regardless of age, political, social, or economic or racial status (racial coming later).
It says that “we are endowed by our Creator” which means be have been given or blessed with the following list. Creator at the time of writing, and much to the chagrin of the atheists, statists, totalitarianists (Fascists, Communists, Socialists, NAZI’s, Monopoly Capitalists etc.), meant the God of the Bible. There was no historical dissent regarding that. What are we “endowed” with? “certain unalienable rights; Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness”.
Let’s look at the word “certain” which means without doubt, clear, unquestionable, absolute etc. Now, “unalienable” which means existing apart from any action of man and which cannot be altered or taken away. Let’s apply those two words toward “Life”. Life is, in this context, a human animate “man” with a beating heart created in the image of God who did the endowing of the rights.
As regards abortion, we now have been confronted with a law that “is the supreme law of the land” according to the Constitution. So, we have to decide what is a “Life”? When does a heartbeat start? Empirically, that can be, and has been determined to be, approximately 4 weeks. So if we use that as a foundation for the definition of life, then no abortion would be Constitutional after 30 days of pregnancy under any circumstances.
Is this a sufficient definition? The above is empirical evidence, but there is also Spiritual evidence. The “Creator” in the Constitution has revealed Himself to man in the form of the Bible which is the written word; spiritually through the “Holy Spirit”, and in the flesh of God’s only begotten “Son”, Jesus Christ. That’s two witnesses to back up God’s word. No time will be spent here on defining or defending the Trinity doctrine of the Bible and its adherents. Instead, let’s just go to one Biblical reference. Jeremiah Chapter 1 verse 5 says that God knew Jeremiah before he was conceived in the womb.
This teaching is Christian doctrine and as such, cannot be empirically proved. It is a matter of faith and belief that the word of God is true. So, how do you reconcile that with a non-Christian who doesn’t believe that doctrine? You can’t. The non-Christian believes what he or she wants to, and that is their truth. It is a subjective truth based upon what they’ve been told, or observed first hand. They are empiricists, and as such, if they cannot touch it or see it before their eyes, they will not believe.
Empiricism is a dangerous belief system because you cannot believe what people tell you (unless you want to), because you have not experienced it yourself. At one time in America, word of mouth was the best way to learn about people and products. Today, we have television and advertising. If you can’t believe word of mouth (which is the basis of official teaching), then you must believe only what you see, touch or “feel” (I feel that’s right.) The problem with that is that we don’t all “feel” the same way about everything, or sometimes anything. If there is no “objective” authority (the Bible for example) to guide us, then we must align ourselves with those who agree with us on an issue by issue basis. This is a very cumbersome way for society and/or a culture to function and it leads to all sorts of manipulation.
The net result is that these factions (pro-life, pro-choice) vie for their position within the framework of that said society or culture. They cannot function under anarchy (no laws or leaders), so they must set up governments for that purpose and to maintain some sort of order, justice, equity, and efficiency of administration. Under anarchy, they would be fighting each other to the death in the streets, but under the system we have, they fight it out with money and elected officials to do their bidding.
The problem arises when the elected officials swear to uphold the Constitution, and then they proceed to violate it. They tax the pro-life people to pay for abortions which violate the right to life as well as enforcing repugnant laws and penalties upon the pro-life community. At the same time, they pander to the irresponsible people who indulge themselves in immoral acts, according to some and according to the Bible, and then they want to cover up the “fruit” of that immorality, or get rid of the inconvenience as the case may be. Additionally, they (the manipulators and politicians – often one in the same) pander to the people who gain great wealth from that immoral behavior and the medical procedure abortion that satisfies their demands.
You see, the Constitution is an “objective” authority, written by men with good intent and a desire to follow Biblical ethics and law. Of course, the Bible is the ultimate in “objective” authorities because of Who claims to have written it. Yes some man sat down with pen and papyrus to write it, but he did so at the direct and explicit instruction of the Holy Spirit of God.
Ah, you say you don’t believe in the Bible, and maybe not even the God of the Bible. Fair enough; ask yourself what do you believe in? Is your belief based upon your “feelings”? If so, how do you get someone to voluntarily “feel” the same as you? Is your belief based upon what someone told you? If so, is that something that is written, so you can effectively pass it on to others, and so it can be reviewed and critiqued by others? The Bible has been critiqued for over two millennia, and has withstood that criticism very effectively, and has been, as time has passed, been proven right through empirical methods such as geology, archaeology, physics, chemistry, historical events etc.
There is an old saying that if you don’t stand for something, you’ll fall for anything. Stand for Christ and you are on a solid rock foundation and will not be deceived. Stand for the philosophies of mankind, and it is a flimsy and slippery foundation – a moving target if you will, and is subjectively applied and can change with the wind. Do you want to be blown about by the winds of change, or stand fast on something upon which you can rely in the most difficult of times.?
Many Links Below – Become Informed!
Feel Free To Pass On Any Posts
Pensamiento Peligroso writes the truth as he sees it, and if it upsets you, then it makes you think!
www.touchstoneconnect.com Subscribe for free – no ads!