Thursday, November 04, 2004

The Policy that dare not speak its name? Mark 2


Even though I accept that abortion is killing, and it is a moral imperative not to kill, this is not the same as believing that it should be country's law. God will punish or forgive sins done against god as is just - but that should not automatically extend to common law. This is where the separation of church and state is the most imperative. A country's citizens need laws which on balance are better for the country, not for an absolute moral imperative. The absolute moral imperative can only be "enforced" through the power of prayer & conversion to a faith, and other ways that do not break gods or the churches laws. If the costs of banning abortions includes indirect deaths by murder, suicide, euthanasia, more meat products consumed or a general decay in societies morals in general, we may be only generating (very indirectly, of course) more inconvenient deaths down the track. If you think that these indirect effects are infact avoidable at a cost of money rather than victims, this would go against what I believe is the essence of human nature. We need to reduce the number of abortions by means other than prohibition. If there is indeed a trend for men to store up some sperm, then get a vasectomy as soon as they reach adolescence, and plan their families to the exact number and time in their life that they desire, this might obviate the need for political lawmaking.

3 comments:

Dr. Clam said...

I'm afraid I have to disagree with you about 103%. :) To quote the klan leader from "O Brother Where Art Thou": 'Is that your culture and heritage? It ain't my culture and heritage!'

You can speak as a politician, and say that the laws of a nation should only deal with what is good for that nation. You can say they should have nothing to do with the imperishable moral law that is carved in letters a trillion miles high at the edge of the universe, and in letters a Planck width across on the face of every lepton. But I can't speak as a politician. I can only speak as a prophet, and I see no other valid basis for human behaviour.

The separation of church and state?
Dangerous modern rubbish.

God will punish or forgive sins as is just?
You're more optimistic than I am.

The absolute moral imperative can only be enforced through the power of prayer and conversion to a faith?
Not when the blood of the murdered screams to heaven for vengeance, not when the ovens of Auschwitz burn children alive. Ask any private from the 1941-1945 Red Army how you defeat evil. Ask the abolitionists who put an end to 1890 years of Christian accommodation with slavery. Ask the Conquistadors who put an end to human sacrifice in Latin America. Ask Muhammad, Peace be upon Him.

Planning families to the exact number and time?
Anathema! Life should be lived on the edge of chaos. "Consider the lilies of the field..."

But I ought to be writing my novel...

Anonymous said...

am I corect in my understanding here that you DO infact agree with abortion in a common law sense? IE you agree that it should be legal to have an abortion.

Marco said...

Imagine commenting here! This post is almost 2 months old. I wasn't stating what I actually thought about it, but that are good reasons why the common law is the way it is. I choose to ignore the common law for abortion, and concentrate on what I should do myself case by case, with that regard. ie. who should I vote for? what weight do I put on policy? And although abortion policy is still low on my list, it has gone up a few rungs perhaps.