Wednesday, February 29, 2012

The Natural Line of Evolutionary Thinking?

I'm beginning to believe that this is the natural flow of evolutionary thinking.  After all, if we're not created in the image of God, then do we have any value at all?  Who gets to determine our value?

Ethicist (and I use that term loosely) are now arguing that some babies should be killed after being born and believe that it's still an "abortion".  This was actually published in medical journals.

1 comment:

  1. Yes, this kind of thinking is a direct result of the evolutionary mindset. Abortion, in general, is due to a denial of human creation in God's image. If we're just animals, why shouldn't we kill each other? If morality is relative, if there is no God to say what is right or wrong, if it's just a matter of what society decides to do, then we can kill the unborn if we want to.

    Of course, if you allow abortion, then why stop the killing at birth. Birth is a totally arbitrary point. Nothing happens during the birth process that can confer a right to life on a child. Five minutes before birth or five minutes after birth - there's no measurable difference. Thus, if you allow the unborn child to be killed before birth, why not after?

    If you claim the unborn is not a person (and thus expendable), surely it doesn't become a person by something as arbitrary as coming through the birth canal. And, of course, those born by c-section never make that journey. Thus, if the unborn is not a person, newborns are not either. There is no clear point at which personhood could be conferred if not at conception. Only conception provides a logical point at which human life and personhood begin. If you reject that obvious conclusion, you are left with shifting sands, unable to decide when personhood begins, and people will naturally come to the conclusion that even those born may be killed at will. This slippery slope of murderous thinking leads ultimately to a total disregard for human life.