Friday, March 17, 2006
Babies as Prize Cattle
Al Mohler has a great article in Business Reform about the modern attitude regarding children and the tendency to abort those who might have some genetic defect.
It's an insightful and depressing article. Eugenics was rejected once; the programs of the Nazis were rejected later; and now we're doing the same thing. The only difference is that the previous programs to improve our genetic makeup was doing via government fiat and program, and the current effort is being done entirely by the individual.
But Al's wrong about one thing. This is not a "relatively recent development." The ancient world did this all the time. If a baby was unwanted because deformed or weak or just female, they would expose it. They would leave it out under the bridge alone and the baby would die. It was abortion, minus the medical invasiveness, and just requiring a little more time.
Christians put an end to that practice as they were able by rescuing those abandoned babies. A rejuvenated and serious church would put an end to the modern practice as well. The moderns have taken away the option of rescuing their unwanted babies. In their selfishness, they don't provide their unhappy offspring even the slight hope of being saved by someone else. The ancients would comfort themselves and assuage their guilt by telling themselves that their babies were in the hands of their gods. The moderns have no gods, and leave their babies in the hands of merciless science.
Science divorced from ethics is a horrible thing. It always has been and always will be. The Romans scientifically butchered the Gauls; the Stalinists scientifically solved the Ukrainian problem; the moderns scientifically pursue their lusts and desires. But God sees all. The ancient "barbarians" were closer to the truth than the modern practicing atheist, of which our churches are full. Those little babies are in the hands of God. He cares for them, and their blood calls to Him for vengeance. And He is listening.
It's an insightful and depressing article. Eugenics was rejected once; the programs of the Nazis were rejected later; and now we're doing the same thing. The only difference is that the previous programs to improve our genetic makeup was doing via government fiat and program, and the current effort is being done entirely by the individual.
But Al's wrong about one thing. This is not a "relatively recent development." The ancient world did this all the time. If a baby was unwanted because deformed or weak or just female, they would expose it. They would leave it out under the bridge alone and the baby would die. It was abortion, minus the medical invasiveness, and just requiring a little more time.
Christians put an end to that practice as they were able by rescuing those abandoned babies. A rejuvenated and serious church would put an end to the modern practice as well. The moderns have taken away the option of rescuing their unwanted babies. In their selfishness, they don't provide their unhappy offspring even the slight hope of being saved by someone else. The ancients would comfort themselves and assuage their guilt by telling themselves that their babies were in the hands of their gods. The moderns have no gods, and leave their babies in the hands of merciless science.
Science divorced from ethics is a horrible thing. It always has been and always will be. The Romans scientifically butchered the Gauls; the Stalinists scientifically solved the Ukrainian problem; the moderns scientifically pursue their lusts and desires. But God sees all. The ancient "barbarians" were closer to the truth than the modern practicing atheist, of which our churches are full. Those little babies are in the hands of God. He cares for them, and their blood calls to Him for vengeance. And He is listening.
Comments:
Post a Comment
