My own experience with pro-life Christians is they adhere to a
double-standard. They're willing to cite secular arguments and/or secular
figures when it comes to protecting the unborn:
The federal government imposing a fine upon anyone destroying a fertilized
bald eagle egg
It would be a crime to administer a drug to toddlers which prevents them
from actualizing their higher learning potential
Dr. J.C. Willke, former head of National Right to Life (who looked a lot
like the character of Les Nessman from WKRP in Cincinnati!)
John Morrow, a pro-life student at Rutgers University, debating pro-choice
liberals on USENET in the late '80s
...but secular arguments to protect animals are met with the cry "MOVE" !
Can pro-choice Christians do likewise? Can pro-choice Christians cite
biblical sound bites like "three times..." and "so much garbage" to exempt
themselves from having to protect the unborn? Or do secular arguments
overrule the religious?
Can pro-choice Christians say, "Les, Les, Les..." or "So much Les...." ?
Can pro-choice Christians say, "Morrow, Morrow, Morrow..." or "So much
Morrow..." ?
Can pro-choice Christians say, "Bald eagle eggs, Bald eagle eggs, Bald eagle
eggs..." or "So much Bald eagle eggs..." ?
Or do secular arguments to protect the unborn overrule unprovable religious
beliefs in favor of killing?
If secular arguments overrule the religious when it comes to protecting the
unborn, why isn't it the case when it comes to protecting animals?
Why is it when it comes to protecting animals, pro-life Christians think
they're exempt from social progress?
Aren't pro-choice Christians similarly exempt from having to protect the
unborn if they don't want to?
Or do secular arguments overrule the religious?
Go on to: Double-Standards
Return to: Articles
Return to: The Writings of Vasu Murti