Steve

Often our personal choices and attitudes have far reaching effects that may not be foreseen or intended. Others that may hear one's speech or observe one's actions are swayed in their own thought life or actions. In effect, personal choices can provide an adequate substrate for a general change in the spirit, or zeitgeist, of the times. I've often heard it claimed that what one generation does in moderation, the subsequent generation takes to excess.

Such is the case with legalized abortion. In the United States, the Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade that set aside state laws and denied the right of the people sent an official message, not only that a woman had a legal personal choice about the life of her baby, but also that they could arbitrarily choose who was to be considered human. In essence the Court stated that the weakest among us-- those with no voice-- could be destroyed at the whim of the mother. The initial decision certainly did not state it in this manner, but the ball was rolling to the degree that today a viable child can be killed through partial birth abortion and far beyond.

It is often argued that a woman has the right to control over her own body. If referring to abortion this assertion is biologically incorrect. The woman's uterus, cervix, and vagina form a structurally complex invagination. It is technically to be considered outside of the woman's body just as the inside of the gastrointestinal tract is biologically outside the actual body. The baby, with its own personal DNA and blood supply, is within the mother's personal sphere, but altogether another human entity.

The subsequent cultural zeitgeist has naturally evolved to a great degree in areas that I'm sure were neither intended nor foreseen. Even a child of modest life experience can understand that abortion is killing a baby. Although perhaps not easily verbalized, even a thoughtful youngster instinctively knows that the officially sanctified argument 'the right to control over my own body' should more accurately be translated 'the right to control over my own personal sphere'. From this paradigm the extent of one's personal sphere is subject to a wide range of interpretation. One's spouse and children are within one's personal sphere and are therefore subject to one's right to control. Bullying classmates have injected themselves to one's personal sphere so are subject to 'choice'. A despot's personal sphere may extend to all matters, public or private, within the borders of his country. The parameters of choice within the personal sphere are limited only by one's desire to play god.

Legalized abortion and its natural offshoots are a greater danger to the health, safety, and continued life of this country then all the terrorists, Iranians, North Koreans, and tsumanis combined. Our official 'constitutional' proclamation to reject God in favor of our own self-deification places us directly in line with an ancient nation called Moab. "And Moab will be destroyed from being a people because he has become arrogant toward the Lord." (Jeremiah 48:42) "They [Israel] even sacrificed their sons and their daughters, whom they sacrificed to the demons, and shed innocent blood, the blood of their sons and their daughters, whom they sacrificed to the idols of Canaan; and the land was polluted with the blood. Thus they became unclean in their practices, and played the harlot in their deeds." (Psalm 106: 37- 39) Moab was obliterated and both divisions of Israel suffered for generations because of their rejection of God.