Pro-life blog buzz 6-8-12
by Kelli
We welcome your suggestions for additions to our Top Blogs (see tab on right side of home page)! Email Susie@jillstanek.com.
- Albert Mohler discusses the reasons why “American evangelicals are rethinking birth control even as a majority of the nation’s Roman Catholics indicate a rejection of their Church’s teaching.”
- Suzy B and Wesley J. Smith discuss the disturbing eugenic implications of a “potential new test to chart the entire genome of a developing fetus.”
- ProWomanProLife links to the National Post’s article on a recently-passed, “under the radar” amendment in Canada which states that all public sector businesses must increase their financial accountability reporting- unless that business is an abortion provider.
- At New Feminism, National Organization for Women board member Kathleen Sloan speaks out against the commodification of women and children through surrogacy.
- At Moral Outcry, Susan Tyrrell eviscerates the United Methodist Church, which is actually a member of the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice. The UMC states:
Our belief in the sanctity of unborn human life makes us reluctant to approve abortion. But we are equally bound to respect the sacredness of the life and well-being of the mother, for whom devastating damage may result from an unacceptable pregnancy.
What are we to make of this in light of Christ’s conception, a culturally “unacceptable pregnancy” for his mother, Mary, who was unwed and could have been stoned to death (“devastating damage,” to be sure) for assumed fornication/adultery?
- Secular Pro-Life remarks on the Slate article in which Allison Benedikt says pro-choicers should “gulp and get over” any squeamishness about sex-selective abortion:
Once pro-choicers get uncomfortable with a reason for an abortion, they are revealing the fact that they place some value on the fetus….
Ignore that hesitation, is what she is saying. Push that feeling of value to the back of your mind. Avoid confronting it….
But emotions occur for a reason. Why is Allison discouraging her comrades from privately investigating the reason behind their discomfort? If it’s an emotion brought on only by pro-lifers, then what threat is that to the validity of the pro-choice perspective? However, if it’s an emotion brought on by innate value in that which you are allowing to be destroyed… well doesn’t that deserve investigation? If the woman’s needs are truly more important, won’t truth prevail?
[Photo via mtholyoke.edu]
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
With the exception of family members who choose to help one another out (sibling or parent carrying their relative’s baby), I’ve always been slightly creeped out by the idea of surrogate parenting. Particularly these days when the woman is referred to as the ‘gestational carrier’. Makes her sound like a thing instead of a person.
Dr. Mohler’s article was annoying to me. On the one hand, he’s talking about more Evangelical Protestants agreeing with the Roman Catholic position on birth control being sinful, but then he goes on to basically encourage it. Towards the end of the article he states Christians shouln’t have a contraceptive mentality, but in the same text he does not condemn it. Maybe Dr. Mohler is on the fence with birth control, but my guess is if the Roman Catholic position is the morally right position, then he must look at the Tradition of the Church throughout history condemning it.
And another thing, how can he as a Evangelical Pastor (I’m sure I’m going to piss some people off) look at Sacred Scripture and draw on that as teaching that birth control is ok. I realize there are differences in interpretation of the scripture in Genesis regarding Onan, but I can’t find anywhere in scripture that even remotely encourages contraception.