All Posts Tagged With: "human life"

As one of his last acts as president, George W. Bush has proclaimed January 18th to be “National Sanctity of Human Life Day.”

All human life is a gift from our Creator that is sacred, unique, and worthy of protection. On National Sanctity of Human Life Day, our country recognizes that each person, including every person waiting to be born, has a special place and purpose in this world. We also underscore our dedication to heeding this message of conscience by speaking up for the weak and voiceless among us.

The most basic duty of government is to protect the life of the innocent. My Administration has been committed to building a culture of life…

He goes on to outline what his administration has done in defense of the unborn. What he didn’t outline was what his administration has done in defense of the already born — especially those whose lives were put in peril by our nation’s own actions and policies.

I wholeheartedly believe in and support the sanctity of human life. But I believe in the sanctity of human life from womb to tomb. That means that human life has utmost value and we must act prudently in all things so as to honor and respect that sanctity of life — and it’s not restricted to American citizens or our allies only.

Sanctity of human life recognizes that war must be avoided whenever possible and should only be the very last resort — not a foreign policy tool or prematurely preemptive action later proven to be unfounded. Sanctity of human life recognizes that every human being has basic human rights — one of those rights is the right not to be tortured as well as those rights specifically outlined in the Geneva Convention. Sanctity of human life recognizes that genocide must be stopped with actions, not just words. Sanctity of human life recognizes that extreme poverty is not something to be ignored or wished away, but rather it’s a “war” that’s worth waging with at least as much energy and resources as we wage our other wars.

Mr. President, I welcome this day as one who believes in the sanctity of human life. I just wish your administration’s policies and actions matched up with your words and encompassed the totality of human existence, not just that of the unborn.

Okie blogger Dr. Bruce Prescott points to an essay by Robert Tapp posted at Religion Dispatches that raises a quite provocative point:

A major controversy in contemporary culture is the question of when human life begins. Religions have given different answers and the consequences that have followed have been very divisive. Does life begin at conception, or at implantation, or at quickening, or at birth, or…? Family planning and contraceptives have further complicated these controversies. Is pregnancy the normal/natural purpose/result of our sexuality—or is it an outcome that can be either intended or accidental (and thus probably undesired)?

We know now that perhaps 30 percent of fertilized human eggs spontaneously cease development and are thus aborted in the early stages of pregnancy—often undetected. A considerable number of embryos miscarry during later stages of pregnancy. If we use the phrasing of the country’s founders—Nature and Nature’s God—what do we make of this reality? Should we view Nature or God as the supreme abortionist? A friend of mine who is a churchgoing fertility specialist speaks of such events as “accidents” but the theological and philosophical implications are enormous. A current metaphor is that not every acorn can or does or should become an oak tree.

…

As we help US culture emerge from its anti-scientific faith moment, we need to stress a rational morality. One in which the playing fields become more level. One in which children are intended—by persons who are prepared to assume parenthood roles emotionally, intellectually, and economically. To bring an unintended zygote into embryohood and birth sets the stage for childhood deprivation, a form of child abuse. A moral society will help young persons learn to avoid this. Premature parenthood entails tremendous costs—to mother and father as well as the child.

*
Dr. Prescott asks on his own blog:

If nature is so wasteful toward human embryos, how can anti-abortionists be so sure that there is a divine imperative to preserve embryos that were produced by rape, incest and in instances where the life and health of the mother is at risk?