First off, I want to thank both Rob and Paul for their wonderful comments below. They are some of the very best, most sincere and intelligent and provocative comments I have ever had. Thanks, both, for reading...I hope you'll stay tuned.
I have just finished literally two full hours of rather punishing yoga, so I feel unusually enlightened right at the moment. As I was reading Paul's comment, an idea popped into my head.
I think God is a lot smarter than the fundamentalists give Him credit for.
One of the great things about God is that you can't fool Him. He knows exactly what is in your mind and in your heart.
Where lies sin? I think it's in the intention, not in the doing.
So here's the thing: are scientists trying to kill human embryos? Is that their intention? Is there any malice in their hearts as they harvest these cells for research? Or are they using their God-given talents to do something that they believe will ultimately have a great benefit for mankind? Are they wounding and torturing blastocysts, or relieving widespread human suffering?
This is exactly the same dilemma with Terri Schiavo. The fundamentalists accused the "activist liberal judiciary" of "murdering" her. But was that their intention? Is there really a "liberal" movement to destroy disabled people, as some blatantly argued? No. No one wanted Terri dead; many saw it as an act of compassion. Can God -- does God -- hold you accountable for an act of compassion if it is misguided?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Too bad intentions cannot be proven.
-SW
These neoconservatives don't give that kind of thought to these things. They're so convinced of the correctness of their own positions that they never analyze any of it. They just believe they're right and everyone else is evil.
Well, there are those, and then there are the ones who act that way, just because it suits their own political ends. Those are the worst of all.
Well, I was in favor of letting Terri go as an act of compassion, but it was a difficult thing to support. She wasn't ill or dying. They had to starve her to death; the doctors in charge argued that her brain was in a state where she wouldn't suffer, and I can only hope they were right. I mean, she slowly starved for almost two full weeks. If we were in error, I hope she has forgiven us.
Interesting question you pose about the rights of the fetus vs the rights of the mother. Frankly, if you're going to pose it that way, I would have to categorically state the unborn child has a greater right to live than the mother has to decide otherwise.
This is why we shouldn't let 3rd parties -- i.e., the government -- make this decision for people.
Post a Comment