Letter: Where does Jesus say it’s OK to murder a child?

I was deeply offended after reading the statement that Jesus is pro-choice in the letter to the editor “How Can Jesus Belong to the Republican Party” (Oct. 13). After 13 years of Catholic education, I want to give you a little Jesus 101.

Every person has the right to be pro-abortion, I mean pro-choice, if they wish to do so.

The Sixth Commandment states, "You shall not murder." In my years of religious education, I do not recall Jesus ever saying it is OK to murder an unborn child. And it is a child. For those who argue that an embryo is not a living child, then you must not really be pregnant. According to JFAweb.org an unborn child's heart begins beating at three weeks.

And personally (nonreligious-biased), abortion is wrong.

I come from a family that has a history of divorce, substance abuse among other types of abuse. In living through these struggles, I have come to realize that having a child will be the best thing that will ever happen to me. It will be my chance to show someone unconditional love and compassion. I could not even imagine killing my child because he is an “inconvenience” to my life plans.

You were once an unborn child with loving parents who wanted to bring you into this world. To those of you who remain unconvinced, I hope if in the future you are in a situation in which you are considering abortion, that you will remember that, like you, your unborn baby has a want to live and a right to life.

— — Mark Wolf is a freshman from Kansas City, Mo.

 

Related articles

Letter to the editor: the scary truth

Anti-abortion displays showed the gruesome realities of abortion.

/news/2009/sep/21/letter_editor_scary_truth/

Letter: Jesus wasn't a Republican

/news/2008/oct/11/letter_jesus_wasnt_republican/

/comments/cr/33/7585/#c2934

Letter: What we all agree with about ...

/news/2008/sep/28/letter_what_we_all_agree_about_abortion/

Letter: What is the FOCA?

Readers should take a stand against the Freedom of Choice Act.

/news/2009/jan/29/letter_what_foca/

Letter: Graphic images force us to confront ...

/news/2008/sep/10/letter_editor_graphic_images_force_us_confront_abo/

/comments/cr/33/8151/#c3797

Free: Pregnancy issues the problem, not abortion

Where people stand on the contentious issue is not as important as ...

/news/2011/jan/28/free-pregnancy-issues-problem-not-abortion/

Abortion unalienable right

/news/2005/oct/27/abortion_unalienable_right/

/comments/cr/33/8185/#c3888

Gentry: Special needs children deserve a chance

Potential bill offers more information to pregnant women

/news/2007/dec/06/Gentry/

Cohen: Let's make Kansas proud

State's response to abortion debate offers chance for redemption.

/news/2010/apr/30/cohen-lets/

Free for All: February 1

/news/2006/feb/01/free_all_february_1/

/comments/cr/33/9370/#c5289

/comments/cr/33/3858/#c749

Choice of a Lifetime

/news/2006/apr/13/jp_choiceofalifetime/

Unexpectedly Expecting: Taé's story

Taé, broken-hearted and pregnant at 16, faces pressure from her family and ...

/news/2010/apr/21/unexpectedly-expecting-taes-story/

/comments/cr/33/8185/#c3877

Thornbrugh: How can abortion be compared to ...

/news/2008/sep/04/thornbrugh_how_can_abortion_be_compared_slavery/

/comments/cr/33/9221/#c5100

/comments/cr/33/3858/#c746

Athletes with children

These KU athletes must find time to excel in both sports and ...

/news/2008/jan/23/athletes_children/

Letter to the editor: Kivett

Students would be better off with formal sex education rather than graphic ...

/news/2009/sep/17/letter_editor/

Letter to the Editor: Pro-choice protection

New amendment would make it hard for insurance companies to cover abortion.

/news/2009/nov/20/letter-editor-pro-choice-protection/

Court nominee's views at odds with country

/news/2005/aug/22/opinion_lawson/

Letter to the Editor: It isn’t condemnation

Student mother writes a letter in response to a letter written about ...

/news/2007/may/08/abortion_letter/

Malicious Intimacy

Four students' experiences with domestic violence.

/news/2011/may/04/malicious-intimacy/

Don’t expect Catholic pope to advocate liberal ...

/news/2005/may/06/opinion_perspectives_myers/

/comments/cr/33/8151/#c3842

Play addresses both sides of an issue

Tonight the University Theatre will perform "Keely and Du," a play that ...

/news/2007/apr/04/play/

/comments/cr/33/1163/#c489

Letter: Freedom vs. Fear-mongering

A response to a Jan. 29 letter about FOCA.

/news/2009/feb/08/letter_freedom_vs_fearmongering/

Malicious Intimacy: Megan and Tyler

Under the Influence: two-year ordeal with abuse, stalking and an alcoholic takes ...

/news/2011/may/04/malicious-intimacy-megan-and-tyler/

Lawson: Choice does not mean anti-life or ...

/news/2006/apr/17/op_lawson/

Brinker: Romney's conservatism a ploy to win ...

Republicans may find themselves disappointed if Romney ends up in the White ...

/news/2011/oct/11/romneys-conservatism-ploy/

Letter to the Editor: Abortion philosophy

Mothers are considered on both side of the abortion debate. Maybe we ...

/news/2007/may/08/abortion_letter_ii/

/comments/cr/33/11553/#c8144

An athlete and a mother

/news/2005/aug/24/volleyball_feature/

/comments/cr/33/11553/#c8166

Brinker: Trump has all the qualities needed ...

Trump combines the characteristics of all the other leading republican candidates — ...

/news/2011/apr/22/brinker-trump-has-all-qualities-needed-be-gop-cont/

Comments

An unborn fetus (I refuse to call it a baby until it is born) wants to live? I am assuming then that you've spoken to one?

Oh, wait, that's right, it's still a cluster of cells slowly taking the shape of a person. It can't consciously "want" anything yet.

Were you consciously wanting to live on the day you were born? No one could have gotten an answer from you and you can't remember back that far so I guess not.

If it's not a baby until it's actually born, then why can you be charged with murder/manslaughter if you are responsible for the death of the pregnant mother? These are charges brought against someone who is responsible for the death of a person, not a "cluster of cells."

csommerville -

Because it's technically a fetus until it is born.

A woman has a right to choose what is best for her in whatever situation she is in. If and when it comes time for me to want a child, you can bet you that it would be my choice to have one. I don't want you or any body that's not in my immediate family to come in to my household and tell me what to do (which is what you're doing here Mark and other pro-control, err pro-lifers out there).

Jesus wasn't about controlling people, he was about helping others and teaching others how to love each other where others would want to hegemonize them.

hegemonize. Is that the word of the day? I missed Sesame Street.

For those who support pre-birth and partial birth abortion, I have a question. Do you also support post-birth abortion? If so, at what time length do you draw the line? If not, why not? Why is it fair to not allow 'some' types of abortion?

I'm not pro-abortion

I'm not anti-choice.

I think that it's the right of the mother to be able to decide how valuable the life she is carrying inside of her is. This debate is not about the grotesque realities of abortion. This debate is not about how killing a child is a morally reprehensible offense in the eyes of God. No, this debate is about whether or not we should write this definition into our laws. In some instances, we have determined that it is alright for morals to be written into our laws, such as laws agains murder and stealing. However, the question of where/when life begins is a religious question. It begins to encroach upon that one article of the constitution that says "church and state shall be separated". Abortion should be an issue decided by individual people, based on their individual faith. It should not be spelled out in the law books, because there is no rock solid definition that is widely agreed upon.

What so many people from both sides of this issue fail to understand is that the government has no right to dictate to you which faith you believe in. If you believe that the fetus inside you is not a living person yet, that is your belief. It is not my right to intervene in whatever decisions you make regarding your body. It is not within the powers of government to tell you that your beliefs are wrong and stop you from obtaining a procedure that you yourself may deem very necessary to survive.

What do you recall Jesus saying to you? There are some questions I have for him, so if you could text me his number, that would be great.

This article is about responding to the article that said Jesus would have been pro-choice. Jesus, according to the Bible, would have without a doubt been pro-life.

"Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart...." Jeremiah 1:5

So Jesus goes into a woman's uterus after sex and guides a specific sperm to the egg? Wait, so then wouldn't he be killing all the other little sperm gametes?

How can you be "nonreligious-biased" if you go to Catholic school for 13 years? I love how people, pro-choicers and pro-lifers, believe that they absolutely know how Jesus would have responded to abortion. Until you have a time machine, and can provide me with a video taped deposition of Jesus himself, will I believe that anyone has the authority to speak about how Jesus would have responded to any issue.

I have authority to speak about what Jesus feels on a particular subject because I have His written Word on it. If the written word is not good enough for you, then stop posting in this blog and start posting youtube videos.

I also have a copy of the Koran does that mean I have the authority to speak on Muhammed and his opinions? What about Jews? They wrote the Old Testament, are their descendants the foremost authority on God becuase their ancestors wrote about him. Its fine for you to believe that you are an authority on Jesus, but don't expect that others will believe you just because you think you are correct. Claiming moral authority won't sway me, but giving me facts will.

I think many people in the church expect a very accommodating attitude with respect to abortion from the outside, and everyone knows that abortion is at the very least legal; I think what gets under many people's skin, including the author of this piece, is when these attitudes are prevalent in the church, and "Christians" want to say on the one hand that abortion is wrong, but Christ would want it to be safe, legal and rare. The role of the church is not to accommodate contemporary belief systems. More can be said about the state of the church with these two recent letters than the state of society.

grad You said I also have a copy of the Koran does that mean I have the authority to speak on Muhammed and his opinions?

YES! LOL... if you have his quote then you have his quote. Why is that so hard for you to comprehend? Are you saying that your words Im reading here do not reflect YOUR opinion?

*What about Jews? They wrote the Old Testament, are their descendants the foremost authority on God becuase their ancestors wrote about him.

Only if they read what what is written. It was written for a reason.

* Its fine for you to believe that you are an authority on Jesus, but don't expect that others will believe you just because you think you are correct. Claiming moral authority won't sway me, but giving me facts will.

Here is a fact. Jesus' words are in the bible. They were put there so you can KNOW what He said. Killing the unborn is murder.

WWMMD?

What would Mad Max do?

That's the real question these days.

ltgr Saying there never was a Jesus puts you at odds with most historians. You are destroying your credibility. If your going to quote the bible, then please do so. When you present the quote instead of "he said", then I can honor the question. Please put any quotes in context of their containing paragraph or chapter also

don1, The word "your" shows possession. "You're" is a contraction for you are. Using poor grammar destroys your credibility.

Thatonedude:

Did you know that those cluster of cells in the first four weeks are in the shape of a brain, a spinal cord, and a beating heart? If you still call that a fetus, then I don't know what you call a human being!

Did you also know that your brain is continuing to develop until you turn the age of 25? In that case, anyone should have the right to kill anyone under the age of 25, because technically, they are still a fetus according to your definition since the human brain stops developing around this age.

Em1 - being a Christian myself, I do not state that I want abortion to be "safe, legal, and rare" as you had mentioned. I don't want it performed at all! I think you need to take a look at this website below to see how an abortion is carried out. It's far too graphic for me to write on here! I just want to know how you consider these procedures safe for a woman?

http://www.abortionfacts.com/online_books/love_them_both/why_cant_we_love_them_both_18.asp"

Orangehead, Good info and well said. I did not know that development of the brain continues until the age of 25. Thanks for the website.

ebrown Eye tink your rong. Kredibility iz knot detstroid bye pour gram'r such az miss using the werd "your" insted uv "you're". Kredibility wood only bee destroid if I dis beleeved in the existense of the word "you're" in the wae that ltgr denies a historical persons existance. If yu had'd betterer reeding comprehention yu wood reel eyes that.

I just can't take anybody seriously who still does not know the difference between your and you're. That is grammar we learned in middle school, and a mistake college students should not be making. That is all.

LOL Oh kay mizter grhamer. Lets luk at whut eu rote.

The word "your" shows possession. "You're" is a contraction for you are. Using poor grammar destroys your credibility.

You did not use proper punctuation. We learned now to properly use quotes and a comma together in middle school. That is a mistake college students should not be making. LOL

You fail.

It's a harder decision that any man can imagine. It's not just for financial reasons, but for emotional ones as well. It's a choice women are allowed to have, and until you have walked in their footsteps, don't judge anyone's decision.

orangehead. This is what I said "The role of the church is not to accommodate contemporary belief systems." I was suggesting that is is objectionable to many in the church (including myslef) to take an attitude where abortion is safe, legal, and rare (the classic catholic democratic argument, aka "the John Kerry I don't want to get excommunicated approach." The argument goes like this. Abortion is wrong and that is the church's stance. However, the best way to keep abortions to a minimum is to keep them legal..?? The argument is absurd, and insulting when it comes from inside the church. That is the point I was trying to make, sorry if it didn't quite read like I wanted it to.

I'll add to that also I haven't walked in that woman's footsteps, but I have walked in the baby's. As a child born to a single mother in the very early 80's, I can still say today that she was under tremendous pressure to "fix" the problem she got herself into. I am only alive today because she had enough resolve to make some hard choices that I still respect her for today. The right choice isn't always the easy one. And while I haven't walked in the footsteps of the single mother, I have a pretty good idea about what it takes to take ownership of your decisions, and will always go the extra mile to help those who make the right one.

Sign in to comment