What Lives Don’t Matter?

 

My progressive Christian relatives tell me that she is happy in the liberal world. (God convicted her when she was a prideful conservative reminding her that liberal means generous). Abortion is not the only issue, she says.

True enough. And I wish the issue was as simple as saying we on the Christian right will work on the abortion thing while you on the Christian left deal with the racism thing. But it isn’t that tidy.

The Christian worldview demands the belief that humans are created in the image of God. It doesn’t mean that we are God. It means that every human life has been endowed with worth and therefore must be honored and respected in ways above what is required for mere plants and animals.

Do black lives matter? Of course. Because black people are created in the image of God.

Do women matter? Of course. Because women are created in the image of God.

Do the unborn matter? Of course. Because the unborn are created in the image of God.

But here is the difference. Conservative Christians may be faulted because we don’t always forthrightly deal with the problems of racism and poverty to the extent that perhaps we should. We don’t make George Floyd the centerpiece of the sermons. Perhaps some on the right can be faulted for not mentioning acts of injustice or finding ways to help the poor in their community. We are too busy, perhaps, expounding the book of Romans that we don’t take the time we should to reflect on the victories that men like Martin Luther King helped bring about.

Nevertheless, no Bible-believing, historic Christian thinks that black lives don’t matter. No one I know thinks the murder of George Floyd was a heroic gesture by an honorable policeman. No one campaigns actively to promote that all people are created in the image of God except for black people (likely for economic or self-serving reasons).

But those on the left do. They specifically argue that unborn lives don’t matter. They specifically campaign that the unborn are not created in the image of God and therefore they are candidates for disposal so that a promiscuous man whose sperm happens to find an egg may not have to commit the rest of his life caring for the mother and child. They want the unborn to not be created in the image of God for economic and self-serving reasons.

In fairness to my progressive Christian relatives, they would say that they personally believe that abortion is a horrendous practice. But there are other issues. And they might even say that it is a personal choice so they wouldn’t impose their views upon others.

Just like we on the right say that we think slavery or the murder of George Floyd is a horrendous practice but there are other issues and it is, after all, a personal choice. We wouldn’t want to impose our view about slavery on others. Oh, wait. We on the Christian right don’t say that now, do we? Because all humans are created in the image of God.

Published in General
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 40 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    I know the situation isn’t exactly the same in the United States. But Ireland used to prohibit abortion.

    But then came the case of Savita Halappanavar. Savita was born in India and moved with her parents to Ireland.

    She was a dentist and when she was 30 years old she became pregnant. But she had some complications in her pregnancy and ended up in the hospital, complaining of lower back pain. Eventually it was determined by the physicians that a miscarriage was unavoidable.

    Savita discussed the abortion option with her physician, but she was told that it would not be legal for to have an abortion because a fetal heartbeat was still present. Savita developed sepsis and suffered a cardiac arrest and died.

    In 2018, during the campaign on repealing the 8th Amendment of the Constitution of Ireland (the 8th Amendment prohibited abortion in Ireland), Savita Halappanavar’s picture was plastered everywhere by the pro-abortion forces.

    The pro-abortion forces cynically used the death of an Irish dentist as an emotional argument in support of their campaign to make abortion legal in Ireland and they won. The referendum to repeal the 8th Amendment to the Irish Constitution passed with 66 percent of the voters voting to repeal the abortion ban.

    Savita’s parents praised the voters of Ireland for repealing the abortion ban.

    As we attempt to enact pro-life legislation in the various states after Roe v Wade is overruled by the US Supreme Court (assuming that this does, in fact, happen, as expected), we have to be prepared for what I call the “Savita argument” from the pro-abortion crowd.

    Because everyone knows that every abortion is about saving the life(style) of the mother.

    • #31
  2. HeavyWater Reagan
    HeavyWater
    @HeavyWater

    kedavis (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    I know the situation isn’t exactly the same in the United States. But Ireland used to prohibit abortion.

    But then came the case of Savita Halappanavar. Savita was born in India and moved with her parents to Ireland.

    She was a dentist and when she was 30 years old she became pregnant. But she had some complications in her pregnancy and ended up in the hospital, complaining of lower back pain. Eventually it was determined by the physicians that a miscarriage was unavoidable.

    Savita discussed the abortion option with her physician, but she was told that it would not be legal for to have an abortion because a fetal heartbeat was still present. Savita developed sepsis and suffered a cardiac arrest and died.

    In 2018, during the campaign on repealing the 8th Amendment of the Constitution of Ireland (the 8th Amendment prohibited abortion in Ireland), Savita Halappanavar’s picture was plastered everywhere by the pro-abortion forces.

    The pro-abortion forces cynically used the death of an Irish dentist as an emotional argument in support of their campaign to make abortion legal in Ireland and they won. The referendum to repeal the 8th Amendment to the Irish Constitution passed with 66 percent of the voters voting to repeal the abortion ban.

    Savita’s parents praised the voters of Ireland for repealing the abortion ban.

    As we attempt to enact pro-life legislation in the various states after Roe v Wade is overruled by the US Supreme Court (assuming that this does, in fact, happen, as expected), we have to be prepared for what I call the “Savita argument” from the pro-abortion crowd.

    Because everyone knows that every abortion is about saving the life(style) of the mother.

    The pro-abortion people will find isolated situations similar to the case of Savita Halappanavar and exploit it to the umpteenth degree.  You heard it here first.  Those of us who are pro-life have to make sure we are prepared for that debate so that we can reassure the public women won’t die as a result of pro-life legislation.

    • #32
  3. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    I know the situation isn’t exactly the same in the United States. But Ireland used to prohibit abortion.

    But then came the case of Savita Halappanavar. Savita was born in India and moved with her parents to Ireland.

    She was a dentist and when she was 30 years old she became pregnant. But she had some complications in her pregnancy and ended up in the hospital, complaining of lower back pain. Eventually it was determined by the physicians that a miscarriage was unavoidable.

    Savita discussed the abortion option with her physician, but she was told that it would not be legal for to have an abortion because a fetal heartbeat was still present. Savita developed sepsis and suffered a cardiac arrest and died.

    In 2018, during the campaign on repealing the 8th Amendment of the Constitution of Ireland (the 8th Amendment prohibited abortion in Ireland), Savita Halappanavar’s picture was plastered everywhere by the pro-abortion forces.

    The pro-abortion forces cynically used the death of an Irish dentist as an emotional argument in support of their campaign to make abortion legal in Ireland and they won. The referendum to repeal the 8th Amendment to the Irish Constitution passed with 66 percent of the voters voting to repeal the abortion ban.

    Savita’s parents praised the voters of Ireland for repealing the abortion ban.

    As we attempt to enact pro-life legislation in the various states after Roe v Wade is overruled by the US Supreme Court (assuming that this does, in fact, happen, as expected), we have to be prepared for what I call the “Savita argument” from the pro-abortion crowd.

    Because everyone knows that every abortion is about saving the life(style) of the mother.

    The pro-abortion people will find isolated situations similar to the case of Savita Halappanavar and exploit it to the umpteenth degree. You heard it here first. Those of us who are pro-life have to make sure we are prepared for that debate so that we can reassure the public women won’t die as a result of pro-life legislation.

    Ah, but you forget the deaths resulting from using coathangers etc.

    • #33
  4. BDB Coolidge
    BDB
    @BDB

    kedavis (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    I know the situation isn’t exactly the same in the United States. But Ireland used to prohibit abortion.

    But then came the case of Savita Halappanavar. Savita was born in India and moved with her parents to Ireland.

    She was a dentist and when she was 30 years old she became pregnant. But she had some complications in her pregnancy and ended up in the hospital, complaining of lower back pain. Eventually it was determined by the physicians that a miscarriage was unavoidable.

    Savita discussed the abortion option with her physician, but she was told that it would not be legal for to have an abortion because a fetal heartbeat was still present. Savita developed sepsis and suffered a cardiac arrest and died.

    In 2018, during the campaign on repealing the 8th Amendment of the Constitution of Ireland (the 8th Amendment prohibited abortion in Ireland), Savita Halappanavar’s picture was plastered everywhere by the pro-abortion forces.

    The pro-abortion forces cynically used the death of an Irish dentist as an emotional argument in support of their campaign to make abortion legal in Ireland and they won. The referendum to repeal the 8th Amendment to the Irish Constitution passed with 66 percent of the voters voting to repeal the abortion ban.

    Savita’s parents praised the voters of Ireland for repealing the abortion ban.

    As we attempt to enact pro-life legislation in the various states after Roe v Wade is overruled by the US Supreme Court (assuming that this does, in fact, happen, as expected), we have to be prepared for what I call the “Savita argument” from the pro-abortion crowd.

    Because everyone knows that every abortion is about saving the life(style) of the mother.

    The pro-abortion people will find isolated situations similar to the case of Savita Halappanavar and exploit it to the umpteenth degree. You heard it here first. Those of us who are pro-life have to make sure we are prepared for that debate so that we can reassure the public women won’t die as a result of pro-life legislation.

    Ah, but you forget the deaths resulting from using coathangers etc.

    No, that’s exactly what he’s talking about.

    • #34
  5. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    BDB (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    I know the situation isn’t exactly the same in the United States. But Ireland used to prohibit abortion.

    But then came the case of Savita Halappanavar. Savita was born in India and moved with her parents to Ireland.

    She was a dentist and when she was 30 years old she became pregnant. But she had some complications in her pregnancy and ended up in the hospital, complaining of lower back pain. Eventually it was determined by the physicians that a miscarriage was unavoidable.

    Savita discussed the abortion option with her physician, but she was told that it would not be legal for to have an abortion because a fetal heartbeat was still present. Savita developed sepsis and suffered a cardiac arrest and died.

    In 2018, during the campaign on repealing the 8th Amendment of the Constitution of Ireland (the 8th Amendment prohibited abortion in Ireland), Savita Halappanavar’s picture was plastered everywhere by the pro-abortion forces.

    The pro-abortion forces cynically used the death of an Irish dentist as an emotional argument in support of their campaign to make abortion legal in Ireland and they won. The referendum to repeal the 8th Amendment to the Irish Constitution passed with 66 percent of the voters voting to repeal the abortion ban.

    Savita’s parents praised the voters of Ireland for repealing the abortion ban.

    As we attempt to enact pro-life legislation in the various states after Roe v Wade is overruled by the US Supreme Court (assuming that this does, in fact, happen, as expected), we have to be prepared for what I call the “Savita argument” from the pro-abortion crowd.

    Because everyone knows that every abortion is about saving the life(style) of the mother.

    The pro-abortion people will find isolated situations similar to the case of Savita Halappanavar and exploit it to the umpteenth degree. You heard it here first. Those of us who are pro-life have to make sure we are prepared for that debate so that we can reassure the public women won’t die as a result of pro-life legislation.

    Ah, but you forget the deaths resulting from using coathangers etc.

    No, that’s exactly what he’s talking about.

    Except the coathangers thing isn’t just about women who may NEED an abortion to actually save their life, it’s about women who just WANT an abortion but can’t get one legally because legal abortion may be limited to those cases where a women’s life is actually at stake.

    So women will die because they WANT an abortion, not because they NEED one, and will do it themselves at the risk of their life.

    And pro-life people get blamed.

    • #35
  6. HeavyWater Reagan
    HeavyWater
    @HeavyWater

    kedavis (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    I know the situation isn’t exactly the same in the United States. But Ireland used to prohibit abortion.

    But then came the case of Savita Halappanavar. Savita was born in India and moved with her parents to Ireland.

    She was a dentist and when she was 30 years old she became pregnant. But she had some complications in her pregnancy and ended up in the hospital, complaining of lower back pain. Eventually it was determined by the physicians that a miscarriage was unavoidable.

    Savita discussed the abortion option with her physician, but she was told that it would not be legal for to have an abortion because a fetal heartbeat was still present. Savita developed sepsis and suffered a cardiac arrest and died.

    In 2018, during the campaign on repealing the 8th Amendment of the Constitution of Ireland (the 8th Amendment prohibited abortion in Ireland), Savita Halappanavar’s picture was plastered everywhere by the pro-abortion forces.

    The pro-abortion forces cynically used the death of an Irish dentist as an emotional argument in support of their campaign to make abortion legal in Ireland and they won. The referendum to repeal the 8th Amendment to the Irish Constitution passed with 66 percent of the voters voting to repeal the abortion ban.

    Savita’s parents praised the voters of Ireland for repealing the abortion ban.

    As we attempt to enact pro-life legislation in the various states after Roe v Wade is overruled by the US Supreme Court (assuming that this does, in fact, happen, as expected), we have to be prepared for what I call the “Savita argument” from the pro-abortion crowd.

    Because everyone knows that every abortion is about saving the life(style) of the mother.

    The pro-abortion people will find isolated situations similar to the case of Savita Halappanavar and exploit it to the umpteenth degree. You heard it here first. Those of us who are pro-life have to make sure we are prepared for that debate so that we can reassure the public women won’t die as a result of pro-life legislation.

    Ah, but you forget the deaths resulting from using coathangers etc.

    No, that’s exactly what he’s talking about.

    Except the coathangers thing isn’t just about women who may NEED an abortion to actually save their life, it’s about women who just WANT an abortion but can’t get one legally because legal abortion may be limited to those cases where a women’s life is actually at stake.

    So women will die because they WANT an abortion, not because they NEED one, and will do it themselves at the risk of their life.

    And pro-life people get blamed.

    A woman use uses a coat-hanger is getting an abortion illegally.  The case of Savita Halappanavar was a situation where a woman asked a physician in a hospital is she could have an abortion to alleviate the back pain she was experiencing and didn’t get an abortion.  

    So, they are really two completely different ethical questions even if both of them might end in the death of the woman seeking an abortion.  

    The Savita cases is likely to gain more traction among the voting electorate than the woman who knowingly breaks the law.  

    • #36
  7. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    Because everyone knows that every abortion is about saving the life(style) of the mother.

    The pro-abortion people will find isolated situations similar to the case of Savita Halappanavar and exploit it to the umpteenth degree. You heard it here first. Those of us who are pro-life have to make sure we are prepared for that debate so that we can reassure the public women won’t die as a result of pro-life legislation.

    Ah, but you forget the deaths resulting from using coathangers etc.

    No, that’s exactly what he’s talking about.

    Except the coathangers thing isn’t just about women who may NEED an abortion to actually save their life, it’s about women who just WANT an abortion but can’t get one legally because legal abortion may be limited to those cases where a women’s life is actually at stake.

    So women will die because they WANT an abortion, not because they NEED one, and will do it themselves at the risk of their life.

    And pro-life people get blamed.

    A woman use uses a coat-hanger is getting an abortion illegally. The case of Savita Halappanavar was a situation where a woman asked a physician in a hospital is she could have an abortion to alleviate the back pain she was experiencing and didn’t get an abortion.

    So, they are really two completely different ethical questions even if both of them might end in the death of the woman seeking an abortion.

    The Savita cases is likely to gain more traction among the voting electorate than the woman who knowingly breaks the law.

    But that’s the larger point.  ANY law that bans ANY abortion for whatever reason anyone might want to get one, will result in SOME deaths when people do it anyway, unsafely.

    And those deaths will be blamed on pro-life people and their evil laws.

    • #37
  8. HeavyWater Reagan
    HeavyWater
    @HeavyWater

    kedavis (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    Because everyone knows that every abortion is about saving the life(style) of the mother.

    The pro-abortion people will find isolated situations similar to the case of Savita Halappanavar and exploit it to the umpteenth degree. You heard it here first. Those of us who are pro-life have to make sure we are prepared for that debate so that we can reassure the public women won’t die as a result of pro-life legislation.

    Ah, but you forget the deaths resulting from using coathangers etc.

    No, that’s exactly what he’s talking about.

    Except the coathangers thing isn’t just about women who may NEED an abortion to actually save their life, it’s about women who just WANT an abortion but can’t get one legally because legal abortion may be limited to those cases where a women’s life is actually at stake.

    So women will die because they WANT an abortion, not because they NEED one, and will do it themselves at the risk of their life.

    And pro-life people get blamed.

    A woman use uses a coat-hanger is getting an abortion illegally. The case of Savita Halappanavar was a situation where a woman asked a physician in a hospital is she could have an abortion to alleviate the back pain she was experiencing and didn’t get an abortion.

    So, they are really two completely different ethical questions even if both of them might end in the death of the woman seeking an abortion.

    The Savita cases is likely to gain more traction among the voting electorate than the woman who knowingly breaks the law.

    But that’s the larger point. ANY law that bans ANY abortion for whatever reason anyone might want to get one, will result in SOME deaths when people do it anyway, unsafely.

    And those deaths will be blamed on pro-life people and their evil laws.

    I agree.  This is why the Savita case poses a more difficult ethical issue because Savita didn’t get an abortion and died.  

    The pro-abortion group used Sativa’s picture as a campaign poster for the 2018 Irish  pro-abortion referendum.  

    I would bet that people who don’t find the “coat-hanger abortion” issue very compelling might feel real sympathy for a case similar to Savita’s.  

    The pro-life community does have an answer to provide.  We can say that if it is determined that a woman’s life is at risk, she may get an abortion to save her life.  No need to talk about coat-hangers or back-alleys.  

    • #38
  9. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    Because everyone knows that every abortion is about saving the life(style) of the mother.

    The pro-abortion people will find isolated situations similar to the case of Savita Halappanavar and exploit it to the umpteenth degree. You heard it here first. Those of us who are pro-life have to make sure we are prepared for that debate so that we can reassure the public women won’t die as a result of pro-life legislation.

    Ah, but you forget the deaths resulting from using coathangers etc.

    No, that’s exactly what he’s talking about.

    Except the coathangers thing isn’t just about women who may NEED an abortion to actually save their life, it’s about women who just WANT an abortion but can’t get one legally because legal abortion may be limited to those cases where a women’s life is actually at stake.

    So women will die because they WANT an abortion, not because they NEED one, and will do it themselves at the risk of their life.

    And pro-life people get blamed.

    A woman use uses a coat-hanger is getting an abortion illegally. The case of Savita Halappanavar was a situation where a woman asked a physician in a hospital is she could have an abortion to alleviate the back pain she was experiencing and didn’t get an abortion.

    So, they are really two completely different ethical questions even if both of them might end in the death of the woman seeking an abortion.

    The Savita cases is likely to gain more traction among the voting electorate than the woman who knowingly breaks the law.

    But that’s the larger point. ANY law that bans ANY abortion for whatever reason anyone might want to get one, will result in SOME deaths when people do it anyway, unsafely.

    And those deaths will be blamed on pro-life people and their evil laws.

    I agree. This is why the Savita case poses a more difficult ethical issue because Savita didn’t get an abortion and died.

    The pro-abortion group used Sativa’s picture as a campaign poster for the 2018 Irish pro-abortion referendum.

    I would bet that people who don’t find the “coat-hanger abortion” issue very compelling might feel real sympathy for a case similar to Savita’s.

    The pro-life community does have an answer to provide. We can say that if it is determined that a woman’s life is at risk, she may get an abortion to save her life. No need to talk about coat-hangers or back-alleys.

    Again, the pro-life community may not think it’s needed.  But they will still get blamed for women who die because they WANTED an abortion, not because they NEEDED one.

    • #39
  10. OmegaPaladin Moderator
    OmegaPaladin
    @OmegaPaladin

    Cassandro (View Comment):

    OmegaPaladin (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    OmegaPaladin (View Comment):

    It is trivial to prove that a black man is in fact a man.

    It is not trivial to prove that a non-viable fetus is a baby. It takes some time before the fetus possesses vital signs like brain activity, heartbeat, and motion. Earlier understandings did not consider a fetus alive until it kicked – the so-called quickening.

    Except because of genetics and stuff, it’s not going to become something else.

    Provided the fetus survives, sure.

    Let’s talk about organ transplantation here. A dude gets in a car wreck with a massive head injury. He is declared dead, but the cells in his body are still alive. His heart is removed and transplanted into a lady. The heart still has the dude’s DNA in all its cells.

    I keep on coming back to vital signs, since it is an easily detected and understandable bright line. However, I don’t think that’s the debate the Left is having. To them, any interference in female sexuality is evil and abortion is a good thing no matter when it happens.

    I did that with someone’s brain once. It didn’t work out cleanly.

    But seriously, that’s why people are given immune suppressants, because the body knows it’s foreign.

    Also, if it has human DNA, it’s human. If it can be killed, then it’s alive. Babies in the womb, are living humans. To kill the innocent and the helpless (especially considering those created in the image of God) is probably the most heinous of all crimes and of all sins.

    I don’t mind eating an omelet, but we shouldn’t cannibalize our own young, either.

    I believe the placenta provides a barrier that prevents immune cells from attacking the fetus.

    Someone can be legally dead with most of their organs still alive.  Living cells from another human can be present inside another human, with only the person with the functioning brain being a living person.  That was the point I was making.   In essence, cells being alive and human does not that they represent a person who is alive.

    The Left stopped trying to argue about when live begins – they don’t care.  They instead argue that the right of abortion is absolute.  Any time in pregnancy (or even after the kid is born), any reason (even pure bigotry), any age of the mother, it does not matter.

    @heavywater – Self-defense is a well-established legal principle.  It can be used against people who are not guilty of any crime, even children.   If delivering a baby would kill you, the baby is a threat to your life and you are entitled to defend against that threat.  Life of the mother exemptions are a natural part of abortion laws.

    • #40
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.