Abortion and Politics

[Brian Stoffregen]

As a PB or former PB unfortunately it matters not on whose behalf he professes to speak. His office carries weight and authority that he should reckon with before making any more public statements. Rodney Eberhardt at a STS General Retreat a few years ago said that as goes the office of holy ministry so goes the church. He meant as we destroy and discard the office of holy ministry the church suffers greatly. I imagine even moreso for the office of Bishop. The sad thing is that the office is often destroyed from within. In my experience lay people have so much more regard for the office than pastors and bishops.

It sounds like no pastor and certainly no bishop can have any personal positions that are aired publicly, because that might destroy the office.

[Matthew Voyer STS]

OK- So we get that Norman hates the Great Whore of Babylon (from whom I draw a paycheck)

But some questions are still out there.  How many of us would claim to accept an orthodox Christology?

I am guessing everyone.

So the question is, if Adoptionism is a heresy, at what point did Christ become fully human?  I would guess that the answer the Church would give, synchronically and diachronically, is at Mary's "Yes!"  And if Christ is like us in all things except sin, and he was fully human from conception, then what else can we be?

Christ's conception was unlike any other conception. Can we claim to be conceived of the Holy Spirit? While we might believe that the Spirit has something to do with helping the particular sperm reach the egg -- that's not the same thing.


John says, "The Word became flesh." From the Latin we say that Jesus is God incarnate. When in the womb does the fetus have flesh? It's not at conception.


So, church doctrine can also speak against the incarnation happening at the moment of conception.

So we have disposed of the issue theologically, contra Mr. Wills.

But the issue is also open to reason and the facts of science.  Before conception, you have two haploid cells that contain half the genetic information of their source.  From conception on, you have a unique, diploid entity.  And as for the idea of the zygote being a "potential" human, then by definition it has to be potentially non-human.  Tell you what, when Drudge posts the story of a woman, having conceived after intercourse with her husband, giving birth to an aardvark, I will graciously concede the point that zygotes are "potential."  Until then, I will take "Fully Human" for $500, Alex

It has the potential to become a human and it has the potential to become dead tissue. It has the potential to become something slightly less than fully human, e.g., genetic defects, missing or additional chromosome, deformed limbs, etc. It does not have the potential to become an aardvark.

genetic and other birth defects create something less than human? Brian do you care to rephrase that? It sounds heartless. Do you like the taste of foot?

[Brian Stoffregen]

genetic and other birth defects create something less than human? Brian do you care to rephrase that? It sounds heartless. Do you like the taste of foot?

I struggled with what to call those who were different than normal. Humans have 23 pairs of chromosomes; but some people are born with three rather than two at chromosome 21.

Is this online statement about Down's Syndrom any better: Down syndrome is the most common chromosome abnormality in humans? Would you prefer "abnormal humans," which is an accurate description -- those who are different from normal. If we say that humans have two copies of chromosome 21; what do we call someone with three copies of chromosome 21 and all the differences from the norm it produces?

There are defects that produce people who are shorter than the normal range - or taller.


A friend was born with a defect that is sometimes referred to as "frog legs". (Doesn't that designation sound like "less than human"?) His legs were not properly attached. They would never work. They were amputated. He walks on his hands. I recently read that he climbed Mt. Kilimanjaro. Sometimes cases like that are called "differently abled" and he certainly is.


I was trying to point out three potential outcomes for a human fertilized egg: it can grow into a normal human being. Something can happen and it becomes dead cells, e.g., never attaches to the uterus; or defects from normalcy may happen as the human person develops and is born. ("Defective human" is also a problematic phrase.) Yes, what I said could seem heartless. Please offer better terms.

[Matthew Voyer STS]

what about just different? The only problem with it is it doesn't do much to support your argument.

[Steverem]

It has the potential to become a human and it has the potential to become dead tissue. It has the potential to become something slightly less than fully human, e.g., genetic defects, missing or additional chromosome, deformed limbs, etc. It does not have the potential to become an aardvark.

My "slightly less than fully human" son is grateful you are not his parent.

[Donald_Kirchner]

Rev. Stoffregen,

Simply admit that it was a poor choice of words (I sincerely believe you did not intend anything demeaning by them) and apologize.

Yes, we can speak of how, since sin came into the world, all are less than fully human, that we are, as Dr. Kolb states, a dishumanity. Thanks be to God that on the Last Day you and I and all will be fully human. But then we fall into the trap of being accused of suggesting that some are worse sinners than others as manifested by something physical (I hesitate to use the words handicap or disability) which would not be the intent whatsoever.

So, simply say you're sorry and continue to ask for help in finding better terminology.

[Charles_Austin]

Pastor Stoffregen has already said he is struggling with the terminology and asks for help in finding better ways to express things. So the quick call for an "apology" is a knee-jerk response that is out of line.

[Norman Teigen]

RE Matt Hummel.  Whore of Babylon.  That's a good one.  I looked up some of the images on the internet, 1498, Luther Bible illustration.  Whore of Babylon.  I always liked that one.

You write persuasively.  I hope that your employer pays you enough.

You argue persuasively about the matter, although I am aware that not all of my Catholic friends would agree with you.  Certainly Garry Wills does not.

There is another angle to this matter.   What is the theory of jurisprudence involved here?  You argue that the issue is settled by reason.  I am aware that settling matters by reason isn't the way things have been determined.  It was Holmes who said that experience, not logic is the language of the law.

The issue is not a simple one.  It involves history, law and a lot more.   

I see much of value in what you have written but I also want to work through the questions of American jurisprudence and the history of the Supreme Court.

Whore of Babylon.  That's a good one.   Those late-medieval people knew how to throw around the insults.

Norman Teigen
Hopkins MN

[Donald_Kirchner]

Pastor Stoffregen has already said he is struggling with the terminology and asks for help in finding better ways to express things. So the quick call for an "apology" is a knee-jerk response that is out of line.

When one hurts another's feelings, even if unintentionally, one says one is sorry, Rev. Austin.

Perhaps not so much in New Jersey? 

[Buckeye Deaconess]

So Mr. Teigen, I ask again, when does life begin?

[Charles_Austin]

And I note again, deaconess, that our personal theory on when life begins is not what matters. Those responsible for civil society and the public good need to come to their own conclusions.
If they reach decisions we do not like, we are obligated to attempt to change them, or if that fails and if we so wish, we can resist them and take the consequences.
But in a discussion about the civil realm, what an individual or a particular church body theorizes about when life begins is simply one of several theories on the table.
 

[Buckeye Deaconess]

Many businesses/organizations are taking their cases to court with respect to the HHS mandate.  Contrary to the claim upthread, the battle is far from over.  Hobby Lobby is one of the recent companies to do so.

http://www.lifenews.com/2012/10/05/date-set-for-hobby-lobby-to-battle-obama-hhs-mandate/

Another business goes to court.

 http://www.worldmag.com/mobile/article.php?id=24105

[Charles_Austin]

Quakers and other peace churches believe that taxation for the purposes of military action violates their faith and conscience. Yet few become tax resisters.
I think that those who oppose certain regulations regarding contraception could benefit from looking at the peace churches.

[Matt Hummel]

Brian-

I am not joking when I say this.  Nor am I attempting to demean or denigrate. Please get help.  I am not sure if I should be more concerned for your soul or your psyche, but reading these last answers of yours, you are very frightening.  As the sibling of a person with a profound disability, I shutter to think of how you look at people. 

That being said- help me out on an other matter.  You, who have spent thousands of bytes telling people that Scripture is not to be taken literally (with regards to homosexuality, etc.,), are telling me that we are to take things quite literally with regards to "flesh?"  Is that the best you can do?  Jesus ain't the Messiah until he had some meat on his bones?  What is flesh made of? Cells.  And Jesus, like every other human, started off as just one, from which all else is derived.  The potential to be flesh or sinew or bone or brain is inherrent in each cell.  Indeed look at the Noble prize for medicine this year. 

Do some zygotes not implant?  Yes.  Do some embryos die? Yes. Do some develop with flaws that lead to disabilities? Yes.  But all of these share with you and me an essential charateristic- full humanity.  That you are purblind in this are does not lesson the reality.

BTW- what you need to use is referred to as "People first" language.  People.  You know- Human beings.  Fully so.

[Norman Teigen]

Thank you, Charles Austin, for your dignified reply to the Ohio woman.  I could not have answered her any better.

Norman Teigen