It’s been an interesting couple of weeks here at Theology Mix and in the social media realm. During that time I have written a post calling on Focus on the Family to remove a pamphlet that, in my view (and the view of many), supported the Abortion Pill. I also made the decision to bring JD Hall onto my podcast “After the Sermon” to discuss a related issue that involved a recent article in Christianity Today written by Karen Swallow Prior.
Since writing that post, and recording that podcast, I have been bombarded (along with Theology Mix) with passionate tweets, Facebook messages, and comments from those who take a different approach. As I reflect on the concerns that have been raised, there are a number of things that I want to address at some point. One of those items is the striking similarity between the righteous indignation that people feel against me, and that which I feel against those who soft-peddle the abortion issue. While we vehemently disagree, we seem to act the same towards those we disagree with passionately. We’ll save that for another post.
Another item, which I want to discuss here, is the charge that has been mounted by numerous individuals about the use of the term “murder” or “murderer” when discussing abortion. That charge goes something like this,
“If you had to look a woman in that situation in the eye, you wouldn’t use that terminology.”
The hypothetical situation always gets increasingly more sappy as they try to convince me that if I understood the hurt and pain of the mother, I wouldn’t use words like “murder,” “kill,” or “murderer.” If I just had the chance to look her in the eye, to see her pain, I wouldn’t use the term murder. I wouldn’t call the sin…sin. No, instead, I would comfort the afflicted and tell them how much Jesus loves them. That’s the story they tell to prove their point. That’s the picture they paint.
For more of the blog, click here.
[Editor’s Note: This post appeared first at Jeremy Lundmark’s blog, Theology Mix]
[Editor’s Note #2: For Lisa Cooper and others who may not know how blogs and citations work, the above editor’s note, present since this article was first published, means it was not written by JD and not original to this blog, obviously. Additionally, the hyperlink will take you where it was first published. On top of that, if you read the article (like even the first paragraph), it should be common sense that JD did not write about himself repeatedly in the third person. Finally, Lundmark stated no less than five times he was fine with this citation (email us for screenshots). We are sorry for the confusion caused by not anticipating the ignorance that abounds in social media]
This excerpt has been provided by fair use. For more info, call a law firm who has lawyers who specialize in intellectual property law.
