About BiblioPolit

Monday, February 20, 2012

Aborted because the father is a rapist

While reading the news at News24 today, I came upon an opinion piece by one Simon Williamson called “Accept the gifts that come with rape.” In this article of his, he rants against anyone who calls himself a conservative, especially in the areas of abortion and women fighting in the frontlines of warzones!  It doesn’t take him long to call people like this “delusional.” In fact, this happens in the opening paragraph! Then, in the very next paragraph he calls them bigots!

Now, we all know that a “bigot” is “a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion” (see dictionary.com). After reading Mr. Williamson’s article, I found it quite amazing how he writes his article with the same demeanour and attitude he claims for these conservatives, a bigot! Once you read the comment section, it is mind blowing to find so many people with that same attitude of a bigot.

Of course, the name calling continues later when Rick Santorum is called a “woman hater” (misogynist), because he doesn’t believe that women should abort their babies. Of course, Williamson’s whole argument is dressed in “women’s choice” garb. The fact that the baby in the woman’s womb is a living human being completely escapes him. The fact is, that with modern technology, no one can say that the baby in the womb is just a blob and not a human being. And, if wanting to save a human life from being cruelly snuffed out simply for being an inconvenience, then perhaps Santorum (and all pro-lifers), is a misogynist. However, even then, the point cannot be made by simply saying so! Preventing abortions (murdering innocent human beings in the womb), is about saving life, not preventing a woman’s “choice.”

You see, even if a woman can do with her body whatever she wants to (which is not a given), she has no right to kill another human being, since the human being that she wants to snuff out, is not her body, but that of a separate human being. Even in the case of rape, why should the baby be condemned for something his father did?

Scott Klusendorf, in his book, The Case for Life, writes:

“Are you and I valuable for what we are intrinsically or only valuable for what we can do functionally?... Although humans differ in their respective degrees of development, they are nonetheless equal because they share a common human nature that bears the image of their Creator. Humans have value simply because they are human.” (P13)

In his short article, Rape & Abortion, Greg Koukl writes:

“’If a woman was brutally raped and would be emotionally traumatized by carrying to term, would you allow her to have an abortion, or would you force her to have the child?’

“This is a perfect forum for clarifying this issue, an ideal opportunity for a leader to offer clearheaded advocacy for the unborn, a terrific time to clear the rhetoric from the air and get to the real issue.

“The simple answer is: Why complicate the crime of rape with the crime of taking an innocent child's life? Or, to put it another way: Why should the child pay with its life because its father is a rapist?

“... Should we allow the mother to summarily kill the guilty rapist if he was caught, so she would feel better? Then why should she be allowed to kill the innocent child to feel better?”

The point is, we do not send the children of criminals to jail, or execute the children of murderers. Why should we execute the child of a rapist? It is still the killing of a human being, simply because he did not make it through the 6 or 7 inches of the birth canal. The baby is found guilty by abortionists, for being in the wrong environment!

Greg Koukl, in his Stand To Reason radio program (MP3),
takes some time to prove the humanity of the unborn.

No comments :

Post a Comment

Please provide me with your two-cents of wisdom!

Related Posts Widget for Blogs by LinkWithin