Monday, April 30, 2007

Checking our presuppositions

You've seen the signs: My body, my choice.

J.P. Moreland says, "...The slogan is empty since it masks the real, fundamental issue: Is there a God who has ownership over our bodies, has he declared anything relevant to what renters can do regarding abortion, and how does one know the correct answers to these questions? This is where the debate should reside, not over misleading slogans about owning one’s body."

CS Lewis said that we get caught up in the point of view of our age and don't realize how much we have in common even with our opponents. We unknowingly share many of the same presuppositions.

In this piece, J.P. Moreland shows us where that has occurred in the abortion debate. We too often accept the basic premise when we shouldn't -- in this case, that it really is the woman's body. When this happens, we tend to try to answer the slogan. Professor Moreland shows us that it is sometimes better to pull the rug out from under the slogan.

As long as we journey through this world, there are going to be some opposed to the work of the Church. Some will oppose us with swords, some with tongues. The latter are the more dangerous. The blood of martyrs is the kingdom’s fertilizer, but an argument unanswered, or unwisely answered, will cause our work to lose face to those who need to see it at its best.


Anonymous said...

I don't have a problem with standing on religous grounds to be against abortion, but you have to be consistant. "Thou shall not Kill." Then why doesn't the anti-abortion crowd support those against capital punishment? Why don't they support an end to the war in Iraq. Consistancy would help their cause in my book - Tim

ChrisB said...

Just about every modern Bible version agrees that the best translation is "Do not murder." An important distinction, I think. You don't have to be in favor of capital punishment to see a distinction between killing innocent people (pre- or post-birth) and killing convicted murderers.

In the end, though, we should try to examine each side's case based on the merits of the case, not on their inability to apply their own beliefs. In this example, the pro-life folks can right on abortion even if they are wrong on capital punishment.

You might not want to join a group that is inconsistent, but you can at least see the validity of their points.

Truthfully, though, none of us is ever fully consistent in our beliefs. That's part of the fallen human nature.