A couple of days ago, I posted some questions to facilitate discussion about the persecution and killing of Jews in Nazi Germany and Europe before and during WW2 in a post entitled, WHAT WOULD YOU DO? Which questions were in turn born out of a previous thread concerning the killing of babies in the womb entitled, Pro-Life & In favor of Keeping Abortion Legal.
In that Pro-Life thread a number of interesting points/opinions, implicit as well as explicit came up….
1) it's not Government's role to regulate morality,
2) Christians have no business getting involved in political processes,
3) abortion is already legalized and thus is a moot point,
4) Christians are not responsible for what is done as a whole in an unbiblical society,
5) too many of the Republicans and the Religious Right have already muddied the waters for useful action,
6) after more than 30 years of Roe vs. Wade, who really cares?
….and the like.
None of which notions hold water IMO. And so I ended up positing that — in both society as a whole and among Believers in Jesus — to reject the one (the killing of Jews) and embrace the other (the aborting of babies) is tantamount to not only apathy, but also hypocrisy.
And it seems to me that decrying the killing of Jews in WW2 while accepting the legalized killing of babies in America since 1973 is not the only incongruity we have in society.
There are other “hot” topics which have fomented their way to the surface of politically correct dialogue, like:
1) the wrongness of male chauvinism
2) the need for women’s suffrage and rights
3) the evil of past injustices to racial/ethnic groups,
4) with the resultant attitudes of entitlement by other racial/ethnic groups
5) the folly of a disregard for, and mistreatment of the environment
6) how the inhumane treatment of animals is wrong
7) the wrongness of bias against homosexuality/lesbianism.
So what we have is the fact that some things are obviously right or moral to one group of people, and those same things can be considered wrong or immoral to a 2nd group. And visa versa.
For stance, tomorrow I could attend a predominantly African-American local church and use the so-called “N” word several times in conversation, and I’d probably not make it out of there alive. And yet, I could also say I believe in abortion and would probably experience little opposition, much less physical violence.
And then, I could jump on a plane and attend a church in the so- called "Bible Belt" that evening populated by predominantly white farmers, and if I were to use said “N” word, I would probably get congratulated, while remarks supporting abortion would probably be disdained.
So my question is, who — or what’s — to say what’s right and what’s wrong?
Why is one thing deemed to be wrong or immoral while another is not?
-joe
P.S. If my hypothetical scenario offends, I apologize ahead of time to any African-Americans, or farmers (sorry bout that 'Scrupe! 
) who may read this.
Joe, I was thinking about this last night and believe a persons preservation instincts have something to do with surrendering when after a long fight, it’s clear that continuing to fight will cost too much – perhaps even your life. It’s true of surrendering in war, disciples fleeing Jesus, the father of the prodigal son, Pilate washing his hands of Jesus after a lengthy battle of wills with the crowd and religious leaders … as there comes a time when it’s obvious to one of the 2 parties locked in battle (of any kind) that the other side is never going to surrender, the casualties are mounting, the costs too high and finally one side ceases hostilities / fighting.
For me, the abortion battle is like that. As written previously, I find abortion to be dispicable – a sin – but trying to prevent the world from sinning is a battle that we are losing – have lost. Perhaps some have fight left in them, while others are simply worn out from the battle and take the attitude (with the world) “so you want the right to sin, then SIN” … it doesn’t mean that I have given up the battle that is in my back yard – I will continue to hold my view and concerning the people in my family / house, I’ll continue to bear the standard of life and Christ – but I no longer believe it wise or even effective, to take the battle to the world at large.
Like we talked the other day – as it says in 1 Cor. 2:14 (ish) – there’s no making the flesh understand the things of the spirit (rightenousness) and as Paul said, the flesh has a mind of its own and is hell-bent on sin … so the spiritual man who tries to convince the carnal man of spiritual things (righteousness) is really just aching for a bruising and is effectively trying to prove God’s Word (1 Cor. 2:14) wrong. That is the epitome of futility / vanity – in fact, where we’re told to cease our vain works – might that mean we’re not to try to beat spiritual wisdom into the flesh of man?
I really don’t think there’s any double standards here …
I have to agree with you scrupe. Abortion is dispicable, but it is an area in which we (those who agree with us) have lost ground, and it is a fight really too large to take on. It seems that the more it is fought the more hostility arises, and no progress is made. My dad was as dedicated to the cause of stopping abortion as Joe suggests we should all be and he died of a heart-attack at the age of 56. He had poor habits that lead to his untimely death, but I believe the main contributor was stressing over abortion. I think it’s wise to focus on our own backyards rather than trying to save the world, whatever the cause. Anyone who wants to try to outlaw abortion has the right to do so, but I will not drain my energy that way. It is futile.
This is the most difficult question in the world to answer. Saying that the killing of the Jews is equivalent to the killing of babies is one hell of a stretch, but I get your point. However, how can you say its all Christians responsibility to regulate society when Jesus himself didn’t try to do that? I believe its our call to share the Gospel with the world, through our voice and our actions. But we have no commandment to force people to believe what we believe. It’s our duty to present the message and God’s duty to change their hearts. So when it comes to abortion we should fight it, but we should not force it. God is in control. He controls the universe. So rather then try to play God ourselves and force on society what we think He wants, lets walk in truth and grace as an example of who He is and love on the very least all and let that we our tool of change. We can’t beat sin, so why are we trying to stop it? The blood of Christ absolves all wrong-doing, so let’s share His fight with sin that was already won, rather then our own struggle, which was lost a long time ago.
I am not trying to be devil’s advocate, but here goes:
Carrying a baby requires the physical service of the mother, so in that aspect, it is unlike any other analogy (such as holocaust, genocide, etc.) In any other scenario, unwanted humans can be saved (adoption, escape, protection, etc.) Not so with unwanted human fetuses. No one else can take them.
This is the basic argument of the liberal — you cannot lawfully condemn a woman to “slavery” if she does not wish it.
That’s why I stay out of this argument. I abhor abortion as much as I do any other forced death. But I see the difference in trying to enforce its prohibition.
And I don’t know what to do other than pray…
(‘Scrupe, no fair bringing up what you and I talk about personally off line. Let’s keep this to what is posted on this blog, that we all may learn from C-BUS-C’s combined wisdom)
Some interesting comments, but still, no one has answered my original questions….
And, its corollary, number 2:
OK, so let’s forget about killing babies. I’m curious about how you all come to your concept of what’s right and wrong, and morality in general.
If it will make it easier, I will not be a boor (just this once), and will not use anyone’s answer against them in an effort to promote a crusade against abortion, okay? I promise.
-joe
Sorry for giving you a hard time Joe
I like the questions you pose…I just don’t like that form of argument: setting up questions so that those answering are *potentially* admitting your points to be true before they even know the actual subject. It is a totally legitimate way to discuss/argue…it just reminds me of my mom. And much as I love her, it is one of the things she does that makes me crazy.
Well, obviously the scriptures have a lot to do with it and so does the Spirit … and that’s only makes sense for a spirit-filled believer … a non-believer doesn’t embrace the standard of scripture or have the guidance of the Spirit so it’s no surprise the sense of right and wrong for some non-believers is very different than mine.
What’s interesting to me, is how my sense of right and wrong have changed over the years as the Spirit has brought me to a more spiritual and less intellectual understanding of the scriptures.
The issue of “right and wrong” tracks very closely with the concept of “good and evil” in my view – and I hold to the view that humanity, having eaten the fruit of knowledge of good and evil, which brought us death – both physical and spiritual – is something we are incapable of judging rightly.
Paul wrote: “all things work together for the good of those who love the Lord and are called according to His purpose” … ALL THINGS … some of those things we might even in our faulty human understanding refer to as EVIL things or count them as a “wrong” that has been done to us – GOD uses them FOR GOOD. So an evil thing – a wrong thing – works out for the good through the overall plan of God for us.
I’ve been hammered several times in this life – things I asked God to remove from me because they were so hurtful – a wrong – someone did an evil to me – something I considered very bad at the time – like my 1st marriage and divorce – I wanted to die at the time. BUT! That process made me a better man – I came through that fire – and I am a better husband to my 2nd wife because of what I went through and learned and healed from in the first marriage and divorce. In hindsight, how can I call that “wrong” or “evil”? I’ve lived long enough to see that it did indeed work out for the good for me, for my children, for my new wife.
It seems as if those things I once viewed in such black and white terms years ago – those rights and wrongs – those good and evil events – are no longer so cut and dried.
Aborted babies – don’t they go to be with Jesus? Didn’t Paul say something to the effect ‘to be absent from the body is to be present with Christ’? So the aborted baby goes to be with Jesus – that’s a ‘good’ isn’t it? Surely it’s not an evil. The mother who aborts the baby – horrible as it may be – might that drive the mother to Jesus, looking for forgiveness? Might that teach the mother how the world is – how if you let it, the world will push you to decisions and actions you don’t want to take? I don’t know that I’ve ever seen a woman who aborted a baby who celebrated it or boasted about it … seems to me all I’ve ever heard of is women who come to regret it after the fact and are driven to seek forgiveness …
You might like to read this article, Joe: The World’s System Exposed
As I recall, it provides insight about a world poisoned by the notion of “good and evil” … rather than continuing to eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, it encourages us to eat from the tree of life …
For my personal actions, I would decide right and wrong based on scripture.
For greater cultural concerns, I would decide based on our shared set of ideals and rights as set forth in documents such as the Constitution, Decl. of Independence, Bill or Rights, etc.
So for me personally, abortion is wrong because that is what I interpret the Bible/biblical principles to say. For the rest of the country I would posit abortion is wrong because it is a denial of the right to life, not because God said we shouldn’t.
BUMP
Who would have thought a perfectly straightforward question could so easily be sidestepped?:
After re-asking, there were only 3 of you who had the courage (?) to answer. And the question is really quite simple, isn't it?…..
By what standard, with what construct do you personally determine what is morally right and what is morally wrong?
With all the regular readers of/opiners to this blog, one would think there would be more than 3 people who have sufficient (ahem) backbone to answer.
Wow. Never underestimate the power of intimidation. I must have more influence here than I thought.
-joe
An Unscrupulous Man said:
I’ve been coming back to this post quite a lot the past few days, and pondering the comments, searching for balance….
And you know what ‘Scrupe? I think I have come to agree with you.
-joe
Joe, I wonder if that’s what Joshua meant by “as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord” – if anything his proclamation suggests that he understood the extent of his rule/influence, that being his family and what goes on in his home …
“”So my question is, who — or what’s — to say what’s right and what’s wrong?
Why is one thing deemed to be wrong or immoral while another is not? “”
Very simple answer to the complex question. The bible tells us what is right and what is wrong.
If you think the Bible is crystal clear on much of anything then you aren’t paying attention.