 Assembly Again Blesses Partial-Birth Abortion Commissioners seek 'sensitive' ways to describe killing little children By Parker T. Williamson The Layman Online Friday, May 30, 2003
The one bone that the majority threw to pro-life commissioners was its concession that it would call the parties to a late-term abortion "mother and child" rather than "woman and fetus," and the addition of a last-paragraph sentence that says "a procedure should be considered which gives both the mother and the child an opportunity to live." (emphasis added) An uphill battle Several commissioners, who fought an uphill battle for the life of the child, struggled hard against the denomination's policy: Tom Cheney, of Western Colorado Presbytery, said that the key point in late stages of pregnancy is "the child's viability." In an early stage of pregnancy, Cheney argued, the weight goes to the mother, but in late pregnancy, when the child is viable, the child has a right to live. "Late term abortion creates a new class of outcasts in which the little ones are destroyed," said Cheney. He urged the assembly to remember Christ's words in Matthew 18, in which he called for the protection of his "little ones." William Conway, an elder from Huntingdon Presbytery, said, "We are not in any way infringing on the rights of a mother to make these decisions, but we are concerned about a viable human being whose voice is not being heard. Who speaks for the child? Who will have mercy and grant this baby clemency? It is not the will of our Father in Heaven that one of these little ones be lost." Middle way is 'beautiful' But Jonathan Ball, a student from Columbia Theological Seminary, said he favored the majority report because "it is a balanced middle way." He said it would be "inflammatory" to suggest that "the mother might be an aggressor against her child." The middle way is "beautiful," he said. Caryl Weinberg, a missionary advisory delegate from Cameroun, said "I lived near a woman named Bethsheba. She was among the poorest of the poor. We prayed together. Always beside her was a little 11-year old girl. The woman told me, 'I found this little, newborn girl in the bushes. I used to take care of her, but now she cares for me.'" Weinberg, who works with AIDS victims in Africa, told the commissioners, "God gave both the woman and her little girl life. When confronted with death and life, we must choose life." Weinberg's testimony notwithstanding, the General Assembly voted 315 to 205 to kill an amendment that would have withdrawn its moral imprimatur from partial-birth abortion. Then, by a vote of 405-108, it reaffirmed the existing policy, adding only the suggestion that other means of ending the pregnancy might be "considered." All about language Changes in the current policy proved unsubstantial. Essentially, the assembly was most concerned with the language it used to characterize its endorsement of virtually unlimited abortion. Even Presbyterians for Renewal, an organization that opposes the denomination's abortion policy, found ways to clothe what this assembly has done in softer raiment. Writing for PFR, Issues Ministry Director James Berkley said following the vote: "This seems to be a careful Assembly. From an observer's point of view, it looks like commissioners are understanding the implications of issues and voting with reason. The quality of debate is high, the 'Well, duh!' factor very low." Berkley said that compared to previous years, the abortion debates "had a much higher and more theological quality to them." Placing a positive spin on the assembly's decision, Berkley said that the majority report was "a little bit better than our current statement," but he conceded that the minority report, which would have deleted the assembly's blessing of partial-birth abortion, would have been "much better." Berkley commended commissioners on both sides for using sensitive language: "Even those who are adamantly pro choice and normally spout secular slogans found themselves bending over backwards to try to frame their arguments in more theological terms, sometimes with pathetically amusing effect," he said. Berkley said PFR was "caring pastorally for some disappointed idealists," but that "today was a far better day than the similar day last year." |
||
Respond to this article |
||
| Home
· News
· PLC
Publications ·
The
Presbyterian Layman Online Reviews · Archives · History of the Lay Committee · Feedback · Links |
||