OSC’s BBC Bias and War on the Unborn

Originally this article started off by “Today (granted I’m back from church at a reasonable hour). . .” We can see how well that worked out. 🙂 Anyway, church is running long, very long, after service I’ve been sharing Christ with a couple of friends who are now attending services for the first time. That’s advice I’d give to my family in the faith, if you’re helping anyone with their understanding of Christ, don’t just send them to apostates R us down the road where they can be assaulted by anything, things ranging from lukewarm believers to women with rucksacks who tell you all about the WMDs that’ve been secretly moved from Iraq into Syria (I sat through over half an hour of this waiting on my friend to arrive at this church). This kind of thing ^^^ would chase people from the steps of the church.

This isn’t my regular church, and again that’s something we have to do for others, find a good, passionate church near them that they can be a part of. If they come to the church owing to your friendship, and are seeking Christ because of your kindness, real God given kindness that’s only part of you because it’s from Christ, it’s up to you to stick with them until they’ve made friends and set down roots and really feel right in the Christian life. That’s something we do for people, anyway, part of my lazy posting explained. Keep an eye out for Wednesday posting from now on. Still, making up for that I’ve put together a nice little PDF on the subject of abortion. Almost everybody who reads from the blog regularly knows that I’m far from a champion of the unborn, it’s not a large part of my posting schedule, I own that. Nevertheless, I do love this topic of conversation, largely because it’s such a slam dunk win for believers everywhere. Lots of the time we have these muddying the waters type conversations, these dull, gaslighting conversations in which nothing is made clear and the believer goes away annoyed that they haven’t been heard out.

Still, at least when writing to me, Allallt, my conversation partner today, doesn’t do that (he doesn’t normally do that). Due to not doing that and being a charitable debate partner the arguments are naked. They’re laid bare for everyone to read, which helps make the arguments plain, and as a consequence it’s all traffic in the Christian’s favour. Although for anybody who’s unconvinced, feel free to read on, since I’m adding a small teaser for the entire article below. . .

Given an opportunity to reply in advance of this article, my conversation partner explained how “I think we should be able to define human life as that which could, with the aid of technology, survive removal from the womb to term. This will change from hospital to hospital, country to country. But, as technology progresses it will become earlier and earlier.” Under inspection these ideas, ideas which argue for the non-humanity of beings based upon their lives not being able to be rescued by our current medical technologies, they’re simply unintelligible.

Take an example from any unsustainable living human being whose life is on the decline on account of serious illness or injury, as neither illness nor injury discount the subject of the affliction being considered alive/human. A man dying of liver diseases, diseases accumulated due to an entire life of hard drinking, isn’t suddenly a non-human or dead already simply because of the sad fact that they’re on the decline physically. These hypothetical people are not merely satisfying various criteria for life, they’re also human by any recognizable benchmark.

Really allowing this slaughter of the unborn to sink in is an upsetting process, so much so that to research just how many abortions have been carried out might be too much for many readers. One thing I’d recommend is to research “the abortion clock,” which records global trends in the abortion industry, and the death toll that’s resulting everyday. The numbers are unreal, and make human horrors like the Holocaust pale into insignificance. The world health organization (WHO) estimate 50 million abortions are carried out every year, although that’s most likely an understatement due to killings of small children which go unreported. I let the abortion clock run for about five minutes, and in that short amount of time I returned to find, since I’d logged onto the page, about 400 unborn babies had been murdered. “Murder” is not too strong a word.

There’s no argument for denying a baby life, as my atheistic debating partner has shown. These are matters of human dignity and what we are prepared to tolerate as a society, although it’s up to everyone on an individual level if they are prepared to set aside their biases and make the hard choices, choices which mean no longer defending child murder, no longer voting for people who weakly support “women’s rights” by slaughtering unborn girls, and choices which end in everyone rallying behind Christian groups who defend the rights of the unborn (that’s something you can do whether you’re Christian or not)

Continue reading in the “what’s new” section. . .

One thought on “OSC’s BBC Bias and War on the Unborn

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s