One of the arguments of those in privanza of abortion is that the state can not cojín its laws on religious beliefs. "We must maintain at all costs the separation between church and state," they say. But it is a fallacy to try to deal with those concepts that will serve as the basis for the enactment of laws – such as values, morality, the meaning of life or human identity – from a distinctly secular position. In one way or another all will bring to the discussion table their own concepts about the existence or non-existence of God or their own ideas of what constitutes good for the individual and for the community.
It is discriminatory, then, to try to silence the voice of Christians in that public forum, on the premise that our opinions are religious, because in the long run all the opinions that are issued on that platform will be as essentially religious as the religious arguments that they reject
Think of abortion, for example. How are we going to determine the nature of the unborn child? Who defines the moment in which a human life begins to be sacred and worthy of protection? Or what are the values that we should place as priorities when legislating on this issue, the right of the mother to decide whether to continue with the pregnancy or the right of the unborn child to be protected? Whatever our argumentation process may be, it will be impossible to maintain it in a clearly secular terrain.
So, if we Christians advocate absolute pudoroso values, we are by no means against the separation of church and state (an idea, incidentally, that arose within Christianity). In a independiente democracy, the participation of all those who have something to contribute must be allowed in the debate, whatever their religious or philosophical convictions.
Of course, the r contribution of the church is not to try to moralize the nation, but to preach the gospel message, through which individuals are reconciled to God through the person and work of Christ, and transformed by the power of the Holy Spirit. Although we must point out that history has witnessed again and again the collateral benefits that have produced the great revivals of Christianity at the social level.
But as citizens of the nation, Christians not only have a contribution to make in this pudoroso debate, but we have an obligation to do so because of the mandate of our Lord Jesus Christ to love God with all our hearts, with all our soul and with all our mind, and love our neighbor as ourselves. It is not hate or fanatical discrimination that motivates our discourse, but a genuine concern for the common good.
On the other hand, those who intend to keep the discussion on abortion out of the frame of any religious discussion, do not realize how dangerous that argument is for themselves. If we defend human life from conception to death it is because we believe that man is a being created in the image and likeness of God (Gen. 1: 26-28, 9: 6). If we put aside this "religious" premise, we have no reason to place human beings above animals. When a society accepts this worldview, it is sowing the seed of its own destruction.
He studied for the ministry in 1979. Later he was sent by the Biblical Church of the Lord Jesus Christ (IBSJ), in Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic, to the city of Puerto Plata, to begin a work there. But at the end of 1983 he was called to be part of the IBSJ pastor corps, where he serves the Lord since then, regularly exposing the Word on Sundays. He is also the author of the blog All Thought Captive.. (tagsToTranslate) abortion (t) news (t) articles