Articles
Signs of Life
For much of my younger years, and for most of my adult life, Roe v. Wade was the defining standard regarding the legality of abortion. A decision handed down by the U. S. Supreme Court in 1973, the ruling made abortion legal nationwide, and since that day, more than 50 million abortions have been performed legally in these United States. That is greater than the entire population of California by about 11 million, and approximately 15% of the population of the United States [1 out of every 7].
I probably don’t have to tell you that this past week, the current Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade and left it to the individual states to determine the legality of abortion within their borders. While some heartily applauded the ruling, and many other condemned it severely, the ruling still avoided the obvious question of the legality of abortion at all because most abortions end the life of the innocent unborn. By this ruling, the Supreme Court still avoided the question of when life begins, thus shifting the weight of the decision to the individual states, which is still a ridiculous idea, when seriously considered. That same logic allowed, in times past, each state to determine whether or not a black man had the legal right to own property, get an education, or to vote. Our country has, unfortunately, a long history of choosing the cowardly way out of important legal decisions, and it looks like it will be a long time before someone actually has the intellectual honesty and intestinal fortitude to address what should be obvious to any honest mind. Life doesn’t begin at conception in one state and at birth [and only if the mother says so] in another.
And let us make this clear right now, in case someone reading this is thinking I am getting political: LIFE is not a political issue. This is a moral issue, for God said long ago, “Surely for your lifeblood I will demand a reckoning; from the hand of every beast I will require it, and from the hand of man. From the hand of every man’s brother I will require the life of man. ‘Whoever sheds man’s blood, by man his blood shall be shed; for in the image of God He made man’” (Gen. 9:5, 6). Under the Old Law, given to the Israelites, God demanded life for life (Exod. 21:12; Lev. 24:17); since the Israelites essentially lived under a theocracy, where God’s law was the rule of the land, too, this was their civil law and punishment.
In the New Testament, we do not live under such a theocracy, but followers around the world are bound to keep the civil laws of their respective lands (1 Pet. 2:13-17) as long as they do not conflict with or contradict God’s laws, but the punishment of death for those guilty of murder is not given to the individual. However, Paul noted that civil, earthly governments are in place to act as God’s ministers and, as such, “if you do evil, be afraid; for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God’s minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil” (Rom. 13:1-4). The point made in noting the Old and New Testament laws regarding the death penalty for those who murder is not here noted to make an argument for the death penalty, but to note, for today, the fact God takes the murder of another human being a serious matter. So should we. Every time — not just when it is convenient to our political position.
Medical Definition of ‘Life.’ According to the Medical Dictionary for the Health Professions and Nursing, life is defined as ‘the state of existence characterized by such functions as metabolism, growth, reproduction, adaptation, and response to stimuli.’ According to an article in Wired online magazine, “when American physicians began collecting human embryos and charting embryonic development in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, they began considering fertilization as the beginning of fetal life” and “physicians began to argue that abortion should be illegal.” [Sarah Zhang, Why Science Can’t Say When a Baby’s Life Begins, Oct. 2, 2015.] But why did these physicians begin to consider fertilization as the beginning of fetal life, and consequently begin arguing for outlawing abortion? Could it be that these physicians began seeing what had, up to that point, not been possible -— the previously-noted functions of life such as growth and response to stimuli?
The article goes on to note that the arguments for abortion changed afterwards, and moved to the argument for viability; that is: Could this fetus [unborn human] survive outside the womb at that point in time and that point in its development? The argument itself is disingenuous, for it should be obvious that even an infant several months old [outside the womb] would not survive without outside help and provision. Of course, an unborn human would not survive on its own — but neither would an infant born at full-term. This argument is mere sophistry to avoid addressing the fact of life existing in the womb.
God’s Definition of ‘Life.’ If you are a Christian, or profess to be one of His followers, then it is only natural and logical that you would accept what God’s word says about life and its inherent value to God, and how valuable it should be to us. In the context of the passage noted earlier (Gen. 9:5, 6), God had forbidden man from eating “flesh with its life, that is, its blood” (Gen. 9:4), indicating God considers a living creature to be one with blood, for that is its life. In the human embryo, this begins about the third week of development. Lest we think it is not ‘alive’ until then, remember that this embryo is also growing — it is living. Inanimate [non-living] things do not grow.
Let us note a few passages in the Scriptures that point to the reality of life in the womb, too. Note that in Job’s complaint to God, he asked, “Why then have You brought me out of the womb?” (Job 10:18). According to this, Job was still Job in the womb [“me”]. When arguing for his fair treatment of his servants, Job asked, “Did not He who made me in the womb make them? Did not the same One fashion us in the womb?” (Job 31:15); Job was still Job and the servants were still the individuals they were after they were born.
The psalmist, in arguing for God’s omniscience, noted there was nowhere he could hide from God, “For You formed my inward parts; You covered me in my mother’s womb” (Psa. 139:13). He would go on to write those wonderful words that still speak to us today about the beauty of His creation and work in humanity: “I will praise You, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made; marvelous are Your works, and that my soul knows very well” (Psa. 139:14). Indeed!
When the wise writer spoke of the immeasurable wisdom of God, he declared to the reader, “As you do not know what is the way of the wind, or how the bones grow in the womb of her who is with child, so you do not know the works of God who makes everything” (Eccl. 11:5). No, we do not know all the works of God, but let us note his words — the fact “bones grow in the womb.” Again, since inanimate objects do not grow, the only logical conclusion is that there is life in the womb!
No, life is not a political issue, and it is a sad sign of our society’s declining morality that we have chosen to make it political so we can avoid the more pressing truth that it is a moral issue and one where we are straying far from where our Creator and the very giver and holder of our life wants us to be. May we come to know and share His view before it is too late. — Steven Harper
