My emerging views on abortion Part 1

I recently received some news that the Seventh-day Adventist church hospitals have been performing operations (The Third Angels Message, 2012). Whether or not the news is true, it has made me reflect deeply on my own experiences and emerging views on the subject matter. In this post, I share some of my reflections and emergent perspectives, especially seeing that we have just exited the season where many Western Christians reflect on the nativity and story of the birth of Jesus.

My ideas about abortion have been emerging from my interaction with a number of persons including young females that have been molested or raped, as well as a non-profit organization that is pro-life (and one feminist to a lesser extent). However, most deeply, my own views on abortion come from my personal experience as a parent of three girls and also as a father that experienced the early miscarriage of my second child.

Further, when I reflect on the story of the birth of Jesus in light of all those experiences, I can empathise with what Mary and Joseph went through. A child out of wedlock in a strict religious society? In my generation, we have been subjected to the propaganda of family planning videos that told us and our parents that two children are better than too many ("A history of government family planning", 2008). We have also been fed by various agencies the idea that poverty is caused by the number of children that we have. We have also been told that we must not have children until we have the resources to care for them. These successful propaganda has so affected our world today that there are developed countries that are bribing families to have children or even more children (Smith, 2011).

But back to me and my own lived experience. It is only now that I realise how the early miscarriage of my second child has affected my views on abortion. At the time when my wife missed her period in that season, our first born was barely a year and a half. I was worried and so was my wife. We had just gone through the experience of pregnancy and everything was still fresh in our minds. It was scary and frightening.

But then the child died naturally within the womb after less than three months. At the time, I felt relieved. Yes... it was bad, but I felt relieved. However, now as the father of three girls, I wonder if my second child was actually the son that we so badly wanted and prayed for. Today, that experience has lead me to embrace the viewpoint that life begins at conception and not at birth.

If I am to define when does a person become a person today, I would argue that a person becomes a person when a document is created about that person's existence. Such a document thereby provides evidence that such a person existed or exists. For governmental purposes, this is usually done through a birth certificate. However, for the parent who wants to keep that child or being, documents are created from the day that woman discovers that she is pregnant. (For example, a photography of the positive result on the pregnancy test).

Medically, records are created to document that a potential human being is about to enter the world. Yet doctors, rather than treat the blob of cells and matter within the woman's uterus or womb as an individual or person with a name and life ahead of him/her, use language and semantics to de-emphasize the person as an "it".

However, in the past, language and semantics were used to rationalise the ill-treatment of Negroes as slaves. Negroes were denied personhood and considered as chattel and property similar to cattle. Similarly today, economists and business managers do the same, denying  workers personhood and individuality, by labelling us as 'human capital', 'labour', 'human resources' or as 'a factor of production'. Hence dehumanization allows us to have 'labour substitution', which reduces the employment opportunities for people in favour of technology.

Hence, I am not a fan of these word and language games. I believe that we should call the foetus what "it" is, a helpless and dependent bundle of potentiality and promise. When I check the dictionary, it says that a fetus is either an unborn mammal or especially an unborn human "more than eight weeks after conception" ("fetus", 2005). For me, it is very technical that the dictionary writers had to say that the fetus is only a human after eight weeks from conception. This disclaimer suggests that we need the dimension of time in order to define when a fetus becomes human. (Time by itself is another artificial construct and language or symbolic manipulation of our reality).

My argument is simply this, that a person becomes human after conception, when documents are being created about him or her. No date and time is required to elapse after conception before we consider the fetus human. Once a fetus is conceived in a woman, we known that the fetus is not going to be anything except human if giving the chance to live (unless the DNA has been tampered with, which is another story).


However, that brings us the other problem of whether or not we must legislate against abortion, which is something that I am still meditating on, as I do consider the argument that one cannot use his or her own moral conviction of God's laws and Biblical principles and impose it on unbelievers. This goes against the principle of free will. Which is why I still find myself keeping silent on these issues.


Reference:

A history of government family planning efforts in Jamaica [blog post] (2008, October 28). Retrieved from http://stanford.edu/group/womenscourage/cgi-bin/blogs/familyplanning/2008/10/24/a-history-of-government-family-planning-efforts-in-jamaica/

Fetus. (2005). Pocket Oxford English dictionary. 10th ed. Oxford: Oxford University P.

Smith, R. (2011, November 3). When governments pay people to have babies. NPR Planet Money Retrieved from http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2011/11/03/141943008/when-governments-pay-people-to-have-babies

The Third Angels Message (2012). An open letter to Ted Wilson on abortion in our hospitals the Trademark and recent imprisonment of Seventh-day Adventists. Retrieved from http://www.thethirdangelsmessage.com/open_letter_ted_wilson

How I view Christian life?

I have learned so much from being Christian. However, I must admit that not every Christian that I have met has learned the same lessons that I have.

First of all, I have learned that Christianity is very diverse (theologically, doctrinally and even culturally). Being Christian is belonging to a globally diverse group of people who trace their traditions, practices and beliefs to the same source, but yet practice and implement their faith differently. In some instances, we believe different things and come to different conclusions about the same historical text, our same common heritage, history and traditions.

Seeing that we come from such diversity, as a Christian I have been forced to learn to cope with uncertainty and such diversity. This includes learning that it is wrong to force your convictions on others within the faith. You cannot believe that everyone must believe as you do and that everyone ought to see and know what you see and know. Even within the same denominations, I have observed and learned that there are differences of opinions on even the same denominational heritage. As such, in order to maintain unity, a Christian must operate within this diversity and learn to respect the convictions of others, even if one personally disagrees.

In essence, I have learned that I can't force anyone to believe what I do. I can only present my personal convictions to others and let the Holy Spirit do the rest of the work of either reproving me for error or correcting my brethren (or sistren).

Hence much of the work of evangelism is personal. We need to study, pray and meditate upon the scriptures, events and even nature to arrive at convictions about what is right and wrong. Then we need to share our convictions, revelations and justifications (or proofs) with others and let them personally decide for themselves whether or not they are also convicted and persuaded as we are.

Hence, I believe Christians must have the freedom to arrive at our own conclusions and share those conclusions with others. However, we must also give others the freedom to disagree without judging dissenters as being hell-bound.

Today, I find myself at the crossroad of being skeptic of dogma, traditions and doctrines, especially if I perceive these as being modern inventions with little historical roots in 1st century Christianity. I am further suspicious of denominational leaders as I know that many have received their theology degrees under the study and supervision of unbelieving Bible scholars. [This is one of the reasons why I do not want to be a pastor, though I feel the calling.]

I consider myself as an explorer within the Christian ideological landscape. I have a map, (a centuries old text written about historical events, peoples and lands). I also have tour guides (translators, pastors and spiritual leaders), who provide annotation and commentary to guide my understanding of the map (unto salvation). However, even with the map and the guides, one still has to uncover for oneself the meaning and understanding of the Christian frontier and find the way that leads to eternal life.

Today, more than ever, I find that Christianity is more about dialogue and conversation than it is about sermons (at least the non-interactive ones). I must have my own personal convictions about Bible "truths", but must also be willing to listen to others and understand how they may see those "truths" differently from me. I must have my own spiritual priorities, but still be willing to accept that other Christians order their spiritual priorities differently. At the end, it about our own convictions and on how God sees our work and faith that matters. Did he give you a particular light that you have refused or rejected? Did he give you a personal instruction or calling that you have not obeyed?

This reminds me of a sermon I once heard from a Seventh-day Adventist evangelist, Pastor Glen Samuels. According to Samuels, Terah, Abraham's father, got God's call to leave Ur for Canaan. On the way, Terah settled in Haran and apparently no longer obeyed the call of God. Eventually, Terah died in the land of Haran and never made it into Canaan. After his death, God then passed on the calling to his son, Abram (Abraham) (See the story in Genesis 11:31-2)

The big questions to ask are:

• Is there a call on your life that you are rejecting?
• Are you going to be like Terah and die before you fulfill what God has called you to do?

The Question of Life

Andrews Memorial Seventh-Day Adventist Church
Sabbath April 25, 2009

At a Sabbath School class conducted by Bro. Melvin Brown, the question was asked: What is Life?

I have just received my response.

To lack life is to lack responsiveness to G-d and his purpose or goal for you. TO lack life to fail to live up to G-d's expectations for you or to fail to live according the intent for which you were created.

The absence of life is to be active or inactivated that you are unable to accomplish your eternal purpose of having dominion over the resources of the earth.

And this is G-d's eternal purpose for you:

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat. (Genesis 1:27-29)

Embrace that purpose for it is the life to be lived!

Readings on Genesis: Chapter 1

After reading chapter one of Genesis, we can see that the LORD caused all life to proceed out of water.

Before he spoke over water to bring forth life out of it, His Spirit hovered over (or moved on the face of according to KJV) the water.

This is a perfectly expounds the symbolism of baptism. That after being baptised, one is to expect a new life to proceed out of the individual who was baptised.


Other things to note:

1. Light came out from Darkness
2. Day came out from Night
3. Dry Land (Earth) came out from Waters (Seas)
4. Trees, Fruits, Grass and Herbs came out from the Earth (Land)
5. Life (Sea creatures and birds) came forth out of Waters (Seas)

All life came out of and is nourished by water. G-d's anointing touched water, thus giving water life giving and sustaining power.

When one is baptised, the Holy Spirit comes down and touches the water in which one is dipped, giving the person the potential for new birth - just as in the day of creation.

Also to note:

G-d created lesser and greater lights. He however ensured that instead of starting the day with sunrise -and with the sun, the greater light, he started our day with evening and with the moon, which is the lesser light.

Thus we find throughout the Bible/Torah that G-d used the lesser light to indicate to man the times and seasons for worship. G-d used the moon, the lesser light as the basis of his calendar.


Two revelations have I received regarding this subject:

• The reminder to men that our greatest glory is to come and follow the night. The new beginning of all things is to follow the end of the world. When Adam fell and it seem as if mankind story went into darkness and into an end. However, a new beginning and regeneration is to follow when the Son of G-d and man shall appear to put an end to sin and death - and darkness and evil and usher in a new age.

• G-d always seeks the humble and lowly to do his purpose. He chose Jacob over Esau. G-d chose Israel over other nations because Israel was the smallest, poorest and weakest nation to keep his timetable and calendar in the earth.
  

The purpose of life for all humanity

I follow in the footsteps of Wisdom to analyse the purpose of life for all humanity. In Ecclesiastes 1:13, the Jewish philosopher, sought to do a similiar thing. He investigated the purpose of life as given by G-d. Like him I have done the same - and my answer is:

G-d has given man life, and specifically you and I life, for us to discover what contributions we must make on earth in the time given.

The playwright Shakespeare once wrote that "all the world is a stage"! How true it is! The earth is an arena, where each individual enters and exists. G-d has given each individual a unique contribution to make in the arena. Some make their contribution and then exit. Others make little contribution, less than their potential and exit.

One must determine what unique contribution one has or possesses to bring to humanity. What has G-d given you that you can contribute with your life in the time slot that he has assigned you to.

Thought or Take home point:

"God has given me both life and a time slot on earth to give a significant contribution to human society."

Life A Journey On Train

View SlideShare presentation or Upload your own. (tags: life inspirational)