How to Think Like an Apologist
A few days ago, I pointed out that many or most fertilized eggs fail to implant in the uterus and die naturally. Thus, according to the Christian view that God controls the universe, God is the ultimate abortionist.
A fellow named Darrell Birkey replied, "So you slander God, blaming him for miscarriages and failures for the fertilized egg to implant in the womb. God designed the procreation process, but He doesn't cause miscarriages,etc. You slander and demean God to claim that he does."
I confess to be being disappointed with Birkey's reply; I was sort of hoping he'd, you know, offer some sort of argument to back up his position. If I were a Christian apologist, I might argue something along these lines:
And here is my brief reply to this apologist nonsense.
First, there is no God, no proof of God, and no mystical soul with which God imbues a fertilized egg. Thus, there is no reason to think that one fertilized egg is different from any other, morally speaking. The final paragraph appeals to human ignorance, as though that resolves any paradox with the religion. Finally, if God did exist, it would be a bit nasty of him to allow some fertilized eggs to die merely so that women could face temptation to prevent implantation or get an abortion.
If anybody else has a better explanation for why God would kill more fertilized eggs than all abortion doctors combined, I'd love to hear it.
A fellow named Darrell Birkey replied, "So you slander God, blaming him for miscarriages and failures for the fertilized egg to implant in the womb. God designed the procreation process, but He doesn't cause miscarriages,etc. You slander and demean God to claim that he does."
I confess to be being disappointed with Birkey's reply; I was sort of hoping he'd, you know, offer some sort of argument to back up his position. If I were a Christian apologist, I might argue something along these lines:
It is true that God controls the universe and whether an egg fertilizes and implants in the uterus. However, when God allows a fertilized egg not to implant, that is not the equivalent of an abortion. God knows before-hand whether he's going to allow an egg to implant, and he imbues only those fertilized eggs destined for implantation with a soul. Thus, a fertilized egg that God allows to die does not have the moral status of a fertilized egg that the woman willfully aborts.
Yes, God also knows before-hand whether the mother is going to abort. However, this remains a matter of free choice for the woman. A woman is bound to obey the will of God. It is impossible for the woman to know which fertilized egg God intends to imbue with a soul. Thus, it is wrong for a woman to take any action with the intention of blocking a fertilized egg from implanting in her uterus.
But why does God allow some fertilized eggs to die in the first place? Why didn't he create us such that all fertilized eggs implant in the uterus and successfully grow to live babies? Why do fertilized eggs fail to implant or sometimes die after they have implanted? God's plan for the universe is too grand for us lowly mortals to fully comprehend. However, the biological facts do offer us a wonderful opportunity to live our faith in God. Some women are tempted to think that the fertilized egg she kills is the same as a fertilized egg that God allows to die. But the woman properly understands that God is in charge, and she must let his will decide the matter.
And here is my brief reply to this apologist nonsense.
First, there is no God, no proof of God, and no mystical soul with which God imbues a fertilized egg. Thus, there is no reason to think that one fertilized egg is different from any other, morally speaking. The final paragraph appeals to human ignorance, as though that resolves any paradox with the religion. Finally, if God did exist, it would be a bit nasty of him to allow some fertilized eggs to die merely so that women could face temptation to prevent implantation or get an abortion.
If anybody else has a better explanation for why God would kill more fertilized eggs than all abortion doctors combined, I'd love to hear it.
Labels: abortion, Christianity
posted by Ari at
2:14 PM
1 Comments:
Another difficult question with the life-at-conception position is the issue of twinning, which occurs after conception, but prior to gastrulation. Personally, I believe life begins somewhere from gastrulation to the point of brain wave activity (day 10-48 after conception), but most people are not familiar with the process. Spiritually speaking, life would begin when the spirit enters the body, so the question for Christians would be "when does one become a 'body'?" If a spirit enters at conception, then the zygote splits before implanting in the uterus, would the spirit split or would another one enter the womb? A bit of a stretch, even for a staunch pro-lifer.
The knee-jerk pro-life response, however, typically comes from the obvious fact that life begins prior to birth, yet society refuses to acknowledge the scientific evidence and chooses the indefensible position that a child killed one day after birth is somehow vastly different from the child killed one day prior to birth.
It seems that few on either side of the abortion debate will actually use reason, science and faith to answer the question at the root of it all: When does life begin? It's not above our pay grade, as a society, to ask such a question, then seek out the truth regardless of where that takes us.
Post a Comment
<< Home