Disclaimer: The opinions, beliefs and viewpoints expressed by the various authors on The Rocket opinion pages do not necessarily reflect the opinions, beliefs and viewpoints of The Rocket or The Rocket staff.
It is no secret that Christianity has heavily influenced American culture. To be anything other than a “God fearing Christian” is seen as un-American and could mean facing discrimination and violence. There are some studies that indicate Americans trust atheists as much as, or possibly even less than, rapists. The consensus seems to be this: Without belief in the Bible, one cannot feel guilt or truly know right from wrong; without fear of the afterlife, one cannot be trusted.
I am not one to pretend that religion has not influenced our country’s origin. Regardless of that fact, we should not, and according to the constitution cannot, make decisions for our country based solely on Christian ideology. To say that we would not have laws condemning thieves or rapists or murderers without the Bible is ridiculous; I do not think it is unfathomable to believe that we as a society could have realized murder is wrong without the Bible, and frankly it scares me to think that some people don’t kill or rape only because it benefits them not to do so. If the only reason you don’t do these horrible things is because you think it gets you a fancy afterlife, newsflash, you’re a terrible, selfish person.
Conservative Christians have lost the battle to prevent consenting adults from choosing who they marry and now it seems they have fueled all of their LGBT-hating energy into the fight against abortion. They truly believe that their God holds the same “pro-life” values as they do, but I keep finding myself wondering: “What Bible were they reading?” The answer to that question is most likely none; most people who identify as Christian are unaware of the truly horrible tales told throughout the Bible and have never actually taken the time to read the book, yet they are quick to describe it as the truth.
What does identifying as pro-life really imply? Pro-choice advocates like myself often point out the hypocrisy of the pro-life movement because much of their ideology actually screams “pro-birth.”
You would think pro-lifers would support free healthcare for all American citizens considering that free healthcare would save many lives. It would be safe to assume that pro-life supporters would overwhelmingly support introducing paid paternity leave for new parents, especially since many pro-lifers are also supporters of the “traditional” family. It would not be a stretch to believe these conservative Christians are complete supporters of increased funding for education and environmental protections considering those things indefinitely increase the quality of life, but overwhelmingly that is not the case. It seems that the moniker “pro-life” actually means “every fetus deserves to be born but screw them after that.”
Now let’s take a look at pro-lifers largest piece of “evidence” for eliminating women’s access to safe and legal abortions: God. More specifically, the Bible, since this is considered by most Christians to be the word of “God.” At no point in the Bible is there any support for the claim that life begins at conception. In fact, the God depicted in the Bible seems to have little to no regard for the proposed “living being” inside a woman’s body.
In this Bible passage, a woman is brought to a priest by her husband on suspicion that she has had sex with another man and is pregnant by him. The priest administers a test to discover whether or not this woman has committed adultery. The priest gives the woman a concoction which whence consumed will force the woman to miscarry if she has been with another man. God “kills” this unborn “child” because its mother cheated on her husband. And let’s not forget that the mother is executed for the crime of adultery.
God commands that the people of Samaria be punished for rebelling against him. “Their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up.” – A direct quote from the King James Version of the Bible. What did they do to deserve such punishment? They committed the sin of falsehood and stealing. “God” commanded the death of babies because the people of their homeland were liars and thieves.
2 Samuel 11-12
In this tall tale David sees a woman bathing and becomes infatuated with her. He sent for her and she was brought to him. They had sex and she became pregnant, but the woman was married. David wanted her to himself so he sentenced her husband to death. David and the woman married and the child was born. God was not pleased with David’s actions, but instead of punishing David, he made the newborn baby sick, made it suffer for 7 days, and then it died.
There are more biblical tales similar to the ones I described here, for example, 2 Kings 15:16 and Psalms 137:8-9. The God described in these stories does not seem pro-life or even pro-birth. Even if the Bible was a viable source to use for making laws, it does not provide any sufficient evidence for outlawing abortion. I would actually go as far to say living in a place which completely abides by the Bible would be terrifying.
If you want to be pro-life, fine, but the Bible doesn’t support you.
I do not mean to sound harsh or judgemental in saying this, but there are very few things in this article that actually reflect what Christianity stands for. I am sorry if you have bad experiences with certain extremist individuals, but Please do not impose those misguided views on the whole of a religion. In the same sense that it is ridiculous to assume all Muslims are terrorists, it is ridiculous to assume that all Christians have no regard for people’s lives after they are born.
Your interpretations of these Bible verses are also pretty far-fetched (which isn’t necessarily your fault if that’s how you choose to look at them), and to write about them as if your opinions are the true facts is only perpetuating the ignorance you claim to be so avidly against. Bias is misleading from all sides, not just from the conservative one.
I would also like to say that I do appreciate you taking the time to explore this issue, it is important in both politics and everyday life. I would just say that it can be difficult when you become too extreme on either side to see truth. “Hate never yet dispelled hate. Only love dispels hate”, we cannot expect to make any progress together if the only people we choose to love are those on our side. Even if another group’s “agenda” seems nothing but stupid to you, they Do have reasons for the things they believe, and to discount another individual’s importance is only widening the already large gap between us.
This article reads like the misinformed ramblings of a newly-made middle school atheist trying too hard to be edgy. Points for consideration: the story of David and Bathsheba is misrepresented; it is unwise to use Old-Testament verses to make a point when many christians reject the old testament as a guideline; using quotation marks to emphasize sarcasm does not make a point more legitimate, and simultaneously makes the writer seem puerile. I understand that it is an opinion piece and is not necessarily reflective of the Rocket, but publishing a poorly fact-checked and derogatory piece such as this paints the university in a negative light. We are supposed to be a college where people can share and express ideas in whatever manner they wish, yet conservative values, christian values and moderate liberal values consistently come under fire. You can mock people for their beliefs all you want when you are in private, but when the statement of your beliefs makes the school seem intolerant, it is time to tone it down.
Disclaimer: I’m pro-choice, and I still found this article to be in poor taste.
The Numbers passage is completely theoretical… It details what to do if the specific situation occurs, it is not a story of a woman and her child being killed. However, in the Old Testament (which is before Jesus came to be), the punishment for sin was death, and so it was not uncommon for people to be killed for their sin.
The fact that you missed that this is not an actual story suggests to me you did not carefully research this topic, and I would recommend doing so when writing future editorials, but I digress.
But back to the point of the punishment of sin being death… Actually, it did not just apply in the Old Testament “world” so to speak, but it still applies now. If you are a sinner, you deserve death. If you stop there of course, I can see how you would think that God and the Bible is not pro-life. However, if you read the Gospels, you will learn that God provided a substitute, his son Jesus, to take the punishment of death for all who call Him Lord and Savior. This strongly suggests that God and the Bible are very much so pro life.
“My issue is when people try to use religion to make policy especially in this instance where there is nothing in the bible that actually supports the claim that life begins at conception.”
This was never about actual women’s rights. You used this as an opportunity to attack individual beliefs and fuel your pretension. Had you written an article with the pure thesis: “America posits itself as a government separate from the church, yet religion continues to unfairly dictate policy—specifically women’s reproductive rights” I would have stood by you, and you would have had a platform to stand on yourself. Instead you focus on attacking and discrediting religion. Rather than appeal to logic and explain that a secular government should have no right to impose one religion’s perceived mandates on women, you filled an article with polluted, half-baked rhetoric in a selfish effort to insult private beliefs. “If you want to be pro-life, fine, but the Bible doesn’t support you” isn’t ousting the unfair policing of reproductive rights, it is ousting religion as you see it. The conclusion to your article says, simply stated, that being pro-life is fine—it is religion that is bad. Beyond that, you go on to argue using a handful of rhetorical fallacies with anyone who criticizes your work, calling it “discussion,” “conversation,” and “expression.” If you want to have a conversation, that’s admirable, but that is not what you are eliciting. Notice that your text comprises most of the comments—nobody will reply to you because it is obvious that you are not actually interested in any open minded conversation.
I do not even know where to start with this article. First of all, it is poorly written. No facts, no sources, all opinions and assumptions. As a “journalist”, you posted this publically, so please take the time to answer my questions.
1. “and frankly it scares me to think that some people don’t kill or rape only because it benefits them not to do so”— So you’re assuming Christians do not do these things to get to Heaven? I do not think that you actually believe that
2. “Conservative Christians have lost the battle to prevent consenting adults from choosing who they marry and now it seems they have fueled all of their LGBT-hating energy into the fight against abortion.” —– So you’re ASSUMING that all Christians hate LGBT? That’s a pretty big stretch. And let’s look at it from another angle. Saving the life of an innocent unborn child, or agreeing with the marrriage of same sex. Two TOTALLY different topics. You cannot even compare them.
3. “What does identifying as pro-life really imply? Pro-choice advocates like myself often point out the hypocrisy of the pro-life movement because much of their ideology actually screams “pro-birth.” ——— You didn’t answer your own question, so please do. What hypocrisy are you talking about?
4. “every fetus deserves to be born but screw them after that.”—– Have you ever heard of adoption agencies? Usually Christian. Crisis pregnancy centers? Have you heard of kids summer camps? Many of which are Christian. Soup kitchens? Oh, many Christian run.
Here’s a few things to ponder. You have no facts. This is a poorly written article and it is entirely opinion based. You ask people whether they have read the Bible, have you? I can google a FEW verses (which may I add that there are approximately 1,586 pages in the Bible—so I’m kind of thnking you left a lot out) and post them online too, and then I can take them out of context, summarize them in my own words, and not give any sources. Now do not blame all Christians because you hate God, which seems to be very evident in this article. Aside from that fact, since you mentioned you are pro-choice, please tell me why you are–because you failed to mention that.