- About Us
- Local Savings
- Green Editions
- Legal Notices
- Weekly Ads
Connect with Us
LETTER TO THE EDITOR: Author’s argument is seriously flawed
To the editor:
I am responding to the letter by Julian Taber in Oct. 11 Record, attempting to show religion and politics must somehow be kept mutually separate.
Taber bases the argument on historically differing views of human conception, states the “Christian Bible” declares life begins at birth, and then quotes the “modern view” as life beginning when a fetus can survive on its own which means, prior to that, it is part of the mother’s body and therefore every woman has the right of “choice.” Then the writer offers the view that “life never ends, it is always reforming itself .... where it can be used again.” The writer concludes the argument by declaring the Constitution is “the law” and we should honor it.
To begin with, the U.S. Constitution is a religious document. The idea that society should be orderly and obey laws for everyone’s good, is a religious idea predicated on a Christian worldview. If colonial America had embraced a religion other than Christianity, we would have an entirely different Constitution, if any at all.
Secondly, we can be quite sure both Jews and Christians have historically sought to follow the “Christian Bible,” or at least the Old Testament. Both Christians and Jews have consequently honored life as beginning in the womb, and neither have historically approved nor encouraged abortion or the concept of “women’s choice.”
I do not wish to disparage Taber’s religious view that life begins after birth or that life just keeps recycling itself; we ought to be tolerant, within the bounds of reason, of views different from our own. However, I think it must be said that Taber’s argument has nothing at all to do with Christianity, the Bible, or the Constitution, or the insurmountable evidence that supports these authorities.
Arthur D. Angst