![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
For the Love of God
23/2/10 09:51And I mean that literally. State Delegate Bob Marshall of Manassas, Virginia, says disabled children are God's punishment for women who have aborted a first pregnancy.
The vileness of this is hard to overstate. And what about all those lily-pure women who haven't terminated a pregnancy and still have children with disabilities or birth defects? What dreadful thing have they done to call down God's punishment? And while we're on the subject, what kind of God would punish the child for his mother's sin? (Yes, I know. Sins of the Fathers and all that...). Why is it that some people want Jesus, who spoke movingly of peace, love, and forgiveness, to be the front man for so much hate?
Update: Now Marshall is backing off his earlier statement. What he originally said:
So it's nature, not God, who's exacting this theoretical punishment.
So what's the deal if you have a child and then, for whatever reason, you have an abortion. Does the first child have a retroactive punishment visited on her? Are subsequent children home free or are they somehow deemed punishable? I don't think he's thought this out.
Meanwhile, Utah has passed a measure to make miscarriage caused by beating illegal. Paying someone to beat the hell out of you in hopes of miscarrying is horrendous--but how many women would do such a thing in a world where pregnancies were wanted, abortion was inexpensive, legal, and unusual?
The vileness of this is hard to overstate. And what about all those lily-pure women who haven't terminated a pregnancy and still have children with disabilities or birth defects? What dreadful thing have they done to call down God's punishment? And while we're on the subject, what kind of God would punish the child for his mother's sin? (Yes, I know. Sins of the Fathers and all that...). Why is it that some people want Jesus, who spoke movingly of peace, love, and forgiveness, to be the front man for so much hate?
Update: Now Marshall is backing off his earlier statement. What he originally said:
"The number of children who are born subsequent to a first abortion with handicaps has increased dramatically. Why? Because when you abort the first born of any, nature takes its vengeance on the subsequent children.
"In the Old Testament, the first born of every being, animal and man, was dedicated to the Lord. There's a special punishment Christians would suggest."
So it's nature, not God, who's exacting this theoretical punishment.
So what's the deal if you have a child and then, for whatever reason, you have an abortion. Does the first child have a retroactive punishment visited on her? Are subsequent children home free or are they somehow deemed punishable? I don't think he's thought this out.
Meanwhile, Utah has passed a measure to make miscarriage caused by beating illegal. Paying someone to beat the hell out of you in hopes of miscarrying is horrendous--but how many women would do such a thing in a world where pregnancies were wanted, abortion was inexpensive, legal, and unusual?
