Pro life or pro-choice seems an ancient way of framing this issue. Much too black and white. For me, there is a great difference morally between a woman who terminates a pregnancy involving an anencephalic child with the recommendation of her physician, and a woman who uses abortion to keep herself from getting stretch marks. We call both of these abortions though they are very different. One is a medical crisis and the other is a means of birth control. Labeling people so you know how to convert them does not sound like real friendship or love to me. Recognizing that God can lead people to different conclusions would. Can you go that far, Josh? A really nice bigot is still a bigot, don't you agree?
As I said under the other post you commented on challenging me about the language I use, I actually think all of the labels are somewhat unhelpful because people are more complicated than the labels we give them. I'm pretty effective at avoiding them when talking to people, but it's harder to not use any labels when writing about groups of people. Here are a few pieces where I expand on that: http://joshbrahm.com/accurately-describe-peoples-positions/ http://joshbrahm.com/call-anybody-pro-abortion/ This is actually one of the things I really like about my friend Dr. Charles Camosy's latest book on abortion, "Ending the Abortion Wars." He talks about the problems with labels in the intro and then puts every instance of "pro-life" and "pro-choice" inside quotation marks. He's being explicit that the labels are only so helpful. If my use of a label in a post that is literally encouraging people to have pro-choice friends tells you that I'm not actually loving, then so be it. You can draw your own conclusions. You and I agree that the two abortions you named look very different, and make me feel differently. Naturally, I have a lot more sympathy for the couple who aborts their anencephalic child, perhaps even with the goal of minimizing suffering. I'm not sure what conclusion you think we should draw from that, but there's the common ground. I don't believe God would lead people to different conclusions, because I believe in a God of order, not confusion. It seems like it would be pretty schizophrenic for God to want some of His people to think that most abortions are morally permissible and for some of His other people to think that most abortion are morally impermissible. It would be easier for me to conclude that my own views about abortion are not in line with God's views about abortion. I would want my views to line up with His. (And if there isn't a God, I would want my views to line up with reality, which I believe is synonymous to the previous statement assuming there IS a God.) I'm having a hard time telling whether you're implying that I'm a bigot in your last sentence or just trying to make a different point. So I won't respond to that unless I have more clarity.
Hi. My whole life before I entered high school, I was only exposed to people who were Christian or Catholic, but once I hit high school, I came to the realization that most of the people around me were Atheist, Agnostic, Jewish and so on. And although in middle school, I'd briefly came in contact with people who sexually played around with both sexes, I hadn't really came to know a person who was pansexual, bi, lesbian/gay and so on. I never thought I would be able to say that my friends were that diverse, but it's true. I'm one of the only outspoken followers of Christ in my community, and most people realize it by the way I dress and express myself. Being around people who are different than me has given me an understanding of what others go through and feel, how it is to live life without clinging to the mustard seed of hope and faith that I cling to, and how they have learned to cope with it.
I have not been able to have a serious talk with a pro-choice person yet, but I communicate with all kinds of pro-life people from different places and religions. The way I see it, I have to love people who are different from me because no one is exactly like me.
Here are a few pieces where I expand on that:
http://joshbrahm.com/accurately-describe-peoples-positions/
http://joshbrahm.com/call-anybody-pro-abortion/
This is actually one of the things I really like about my friend Dr. Charles Camosy's latest book on abortion, "Ending the Abortion Wars." He talks about the problems with labels in the intro and then puts every instance of "pro-life" and "pro-choice" inside quotation marks. He's being explicit that the labels are only so helpful.
If my use of a label in a post that is literally encouraging people to have pro-choice friends tells you that I'm not actually loving, then so be it. You can draw your own conclusions.
You and I agree that the two abortions you named look very different, and make me feel differently. Naturally, I have a lot more sympathy for the couple who aborts their anencephalic child, perhaps even with the goal of minimizing suffering. I'm not sure what conclusion you think we should draw from that, but there's the common ground.
I don't believe God would lead people to different conclusions, because I believe in a God of order, not confusion. It seems like it would be pretty schizophrenic for God to want some of His people to think that most abortions are morally permissible and for some of His other people to think that most abortion are morally impermissible.
It would be easier for me to conclude that my own views about abortion are not in line with God's views about abortion. I would want my views to line up with His. (And if there isn't a God, I would want my views to line up with reality, which I believe is synonymous to the previous statement assuming there IS a God.)
I'm having a hard time telling whether you're implying that I'm a bigot in your last sentence or just trying to make a different point. So I won't respond to that unless I have more clarity.
The way I see it, I have to love people who are different from me because no one is exactly like me.