Two issues continually divide our society politically and religiously — abortion and homosexuality. Today we appear farther apart than ever. But are we asking the right questions?
If life begins at conception, then termination of a fetus in utero at any point is taking a human life. And if sexual orientation is a choice, then homosexual acts, clearly contrary to what we are anatomically equipped for, are unnatural and, therefore, wrong.
Opponents of abortion believe that at the very moment of conception a little person is created with a mind and a soul. Pro-choice proponents say no human life is present at this point, only the potential. Does the answer lie somewhere between?
Many scientists believe there is a period after conception when the human zygote lacks the neurological development and cellular differentiation to be considered a being of any kind. There is some agreement that the human fetus only becomes viable at some later point, but no general consensus as to when.
Many evangelical fundamentalists, vehement opponents of gay rights, tell us that if one cannot remember the place and time one’s soul was saved, it probably wasn’t. By the same logic, if sexual orientation is a choice, shouldn’t fundamentalists be able to recall the time and place of that decision? A lifelong heterosexual myself, for the life of me I can’t recall when I was first attracted to girls. In fact, I can’t remember when I wasn’t — like I was born this way. Funny, many homosexuals say the same thing.
Until we convene our best scientific, legal and theological minds and address these issues honestly, objectively, dispassionately and yes, prayerfully, this polemic will never advance beyond the name-calling stage where it is today.
George B. Reed, Jr., Rossville
Your first subject question should be; At what point does a fetus become a separate being from the mother?
The second subject: How can it be a product of birth if there is a purpose for the sexual organ?
What we do know.
There is a point at which a fetus reacts, and moves on its own. There is also a point when a fetus feels pain.
IMO; at the point of independent movement, or reactions we can prove that it is a separate being. Therefore, the argument that she can do what she wants with her body does not hold water. If it is a separate being then it is not part of her body that is being removed.
The pain is further proof. This has been witnessed by Doctors for years and now there is video of a fetus riving in pain while it is dying.
Homosexuals have no leg to stand on. If there is a creator, and they are born gay then the creator made a mistake. If evolution is true and they are born gay then they have a birth defect therefore not normal.
Eitherway they are not normal
Life and Pain is in all organisms that have blood, right? So my question is: is it a crime to kill any living thing? I do not believe this of course because I eat meat and hunt it as well.
I make a distinction that a person should be protected once it has a soul. It is my spiritual view and one that takes place when that human takes it's first breath.
I do not blame anyone for aborting babies, that is something they will have to take up with their creator. I would do the same if I knew my child would not have any quality of life. In my view, it would be cruel to allow someone to suffer their whole miserable life as a vegetable.
What about a religious view that babies have souls at conception? Well then there are Billions of babies in heaven and when is that bad?