I’m Not Pro-Life and You Shouldn’t Be Either

Language is a very odd thing.

For example, you read the title of this post and probably jumped to conclusions that I am talking about the issue of abortion. The term “pro-life” has taken on a nuance all its own. One cannot use it apart for the abortion discussion anymore.

The other day I cam across a piece (for the life of me I can’t remember where) that said people like me who disagree with abortion but still believe in the death penalty should rather say, “I’m pro-birth.”

Well, that’s just ridiculous.

As I mentioned, the phrase has taken on a nuance all its own.

But for the sake of argument and to placate that person, fine – I’m not pro-life. I’m pro birth.

But I’m also for the death penalty, so I guess I’m pro-death…in certain circumstances…well, it’s complicated. No, “pro-death” is just stupid.

But I digress.

Most of the world knows about the execution of Oklahoma inmate Clayton Lockett. The media jumped all over the story and called it a “botched execution.”

But here’s the thing. Let’s look at the situation from a results-oriented perspective.

The desired result was the execution of a real gem:

Here’s an AP summary of his crimes, in addition to first-degree murder: “conspiracy, first-degree burglary, three counts of assault with a dangerous weapon, three counts of forcible oral sodomy, four counts of first-degree rape, four counts of kidnapping and two counts of robbery by force and fear.

I’m sorry – did I say gem? I meant scumbag.

So the desired result was putting this man to death. But if that’s the desired outcome, they seemed to succeed.

It wasn’t a botched execution. Perhaps they botched up trying to put the man to sleep before they put him to death, the but the execution achieved the desired results.

From a biblical point of view, I don’t have a problem with this.

There are certain things people do that God said (and society today STILL says), “Sorry, scumbag, but your behavior nullifies your right to take another breath.”

But…but…but…what about turning the other cheek? What about the love of Jesus?

Even Jesus showed righteous anger at scumbags. He never overturned the old Law. The stuff that pissed God off then still does now. If humanity is God’s image on earth (and the Bible says it is) then heinous crimes against humanity are really crimes against the creator.

And sometimes scumbags don’t deserve to be here any more.

And this is me getting off my soapbox…………

Advertisements

11 thoughts on “I’m Not Pro-Life and You Shouldn’t Be Either

  1. Great point. Clean up the vulgarity and you’ll be on your way, in my opinion! It only detracts from the solid, biblical content of the post.

  2. You know what I’m talking about. And you also know that it is vulgar speech. It is particularly notable that the context you used it in was in reference to our Holy God who I know you adore.

    I realize that oftentimes subjects like this can be considered cloudy, which is why I added IMO.

    I just see your post as really beneficial and worthy in regard to the content, and I can imagine you losing people because of what may be perceived as offensive (with good reason).

    Please consider these prooftexts and see if maybe you could agree with me that you can do better. Ephesians 4:29, Ephesians 5:4, Colossians 3:8, Matthew 12:36, Exodus 20:7, Psalm 19:14, Colossians 4:6, Proverbs 25:11

    I think this is just a handful of verses which I would commend to you are encouragements or exhortations to elevate the quality of our speech as Christians. Couple that with our desire to avoid the appearance of evil and not cause a weaker brother to stumble if this area is difficult for him, I’d say this is compelling enough to avoid certain phrases or words if there are suitable, respectable replacements.

    Even a decent regular dictionary classifies it as vulgar.
    http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pissed%20off

    Not trying to arguing, just sharing my thoughts about it. Again, great article.

  3. I have a couple of problems with this. First, it seems heavily implied that you have no problem with needless suffering. Whether or not you are pro death penalty, it seems that, from a humanitarian perspective, there is no reason to not ensure that executions are done in a painless manner.

    Second, you make a pretty big logical leap in saying that Christ having righteous anger is the same as him being pro-death penalty. And we all commit crimes against the creator, everytime we sin; everytime we harm other human beings. But surely these everyday sins are not worthy of the death penalty? From a Biblical perspective, which I believe you are stressing, I don’t think you can make a strong case for Jesus being pro-death penalty. And Jesus is God incarnate. I don’t think such a case can be built entirely off of OT law when Jesus instructs those without sin to cast the first stone.

    • Concerning your first point, I look at things from a Biblical perspective, not a humanitarian perspective.

      Secondly, all sins are worthy of the death penalty, but not necessarily at our hand. God will ultimately punish everyone that sins, except those whom His Son saves (causes to have no sin). There are some laws made in the Old Testament, such as eating pork and so on, that don’t have any application to us today. Reason being, God has told us in one way or another that they no longer apply. However, the entirety of the Ten Commandments, among others, was never retracted. After all, what is sin? Sin is anything that is contrary to God’s Law. If people still sin today, then God’s Law must still be in effect. If God’s Law is still in effect, then we should try to follow it.

      What? Am I saying that we should obey God? That would be legalism!! If you obey God because He said to, then you aren’t a real Christian. Christians don’t obey God, right?

      Christians don’t make a show of obeying God’s Law. It should be something you do because you love Him, a natural reflex. You should love God’s Law. Don’t be a showy Pharisee.

      What I’m trying to say is that while Jesus said that those without sin should cast the first stone, he was also not nullifying the law. He was pardoning the convicted. He was taking her sin as His own, and giving her His righteousness. We don’t have the power to do that kind of thing. God has commanded for us to put to death those who commit certain sins. As we have not the authority to pardon the sinner as did Jesus, we must obey God.

      • God has not commanded US to put anyone to death. He commanded the ancient Jews to put people to death because they were still a very young people. Let me make the oft made comparison of the ancient Jews to a toddler. They are still learning right from wrong, are still trying to figure out what this God is who seems to be so different from all the other gods. It was completely necessary for the God who is one to put rather restrictive laws on these people or they would run rampant in sin.

        Do not read this as me saying that we have God figured out and none of that old stuff can help us! I think it can help us a great deal when viewed in it’s proper context. But when Jesus comes to make a new covenant with the people, an all inclusive covenant, it is a covenant that brings peace; a covenant that conquers death not brings more death.

        And before you say that God is unchanging through history, I would argue that this is not an instance of him changing his mind. It is an instance of God knowing exactly how to deal with his people in their unique set of circumstances.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s