Psalm 127 and RU 486


Sadly, we live in an RU 486 world, where children are viewed as an interruption to an otherwise carefree sexual lifestyle. Just the other day, courts ruled that the “Plan B” abortion pill would be available to 17 year olds over the counter (see here). 

We can rest assured that sexual promiscuity comes with a great price, not the least of which is kindling the wrath of God. More important, perhaps, for us to remember is the mercy of God in giving us order and command in relation to our sexuality and in relation to the natural consequences of sexuality—children. “Behold, children are a heritage from the Lord, the fruit of the womb a reward,” declares Psalm 127.

Now, nations around the world are understanding the significance of God’s plan for families. China is struggling with how 1 adult worker is supposed to provide for his own needs plus the needs of 2 aging parents and 4 elderly grandparents. In Russia, the de-population dynamic has the government begging for Russians to return home (see this article). 

And Europe? All over Europe the depopulation vacuum is leaving space which must be filled by someone. Turns out, Muslims are more than happy to oblige. They never bought in to the promiscuity “Plan B” mentality of depopulating families. So, they have lots of children and grandchildren and are still having babies. In Lyons, France, for instance, Muslims are the majority in the maternity ward, having more babies than native Frenchman (See Mark Steyn’s America Alone). 

Dr. Mohler recently blogged on this important topic (see here),  and he recommends this book as an important resource.  I will simply point out that the man is blessed who fills his quiver with children.

Whose Body Is Aborted?


So, I wasn’t the only one thinking of putting out helpful, practical guides for speaking about abortion. Turns out, the guys over at “Between Two Worlds” are doing the same thing. They have published an article by D. A. Carson on practical strategies for discussing abortion. If you want a truly brilliant man’s advice on speaking about abortion, check out Carson.

Modestly, I still recommend reading the articles here simply because they are intended to serve a different function. These articles will give you the real components of meaningful conversation, as suggested by Carson. In this post, we will examine the claim that abortion should be the mother’s choice because it concerns her body.

There are a couple of quick responses which challenge the notion that a woman is free to have an abortion because the baby is a part of her body. First, is the woman (or a man) free to do whatever she wishes with her body? We once had laws against suicide. We have laws against prostitution. We have laws restricting nakedness. It isn’t completely clear that women are free to do whatever they wish with their own bodies.

But, more to the point, is a baby really a part of the woman’s body? The evidence says a baby is not part of the mother’s body; rather, the baby is a human entity in its own right. For instance, from the time of conception, the baby has its own, unique genetic code. As the baby develops in the womb, he develops his own two eyes, his own two arms, his own two legs, his own heart, his own lungs, his own brains, his own sexual reproductive organs. Does the mother claim to be both male and female? Does the mother claim to have four legs, two brains, four nostrils, and twenty fingers?

Finally, scientists have demonstrated the unique nature of conception by fertilizing a white baby in a Petri dish and implanting the conceptus into a black mother. When the baby is born, she is white, not black like the birth mother. So, while it is true that the baby is attached to a mother’s body, it does not appear to be true that the baby is part of the mother’s body. The baby is attached in the same sense a nursing child attaches to the mother in order to get nutrition; it is not attached in the sense a wart might be attached to her elbow.

So, the question really is not a question concerning what the mother should do with her body, but, rather, what the mother ought to do with her child’s body. We ought to pass laws which protect children in cases where a parent wishes to do harm.