Join (Free!) | Login  

     Popular! Books, Stories, Articles, Poetry
   Services MarketPlace (Free to post!)
Where Authors and Readers come together!


Featured Authors:  Jacob Taylor, iKathryn Carrington, iBrad Bathgate, iAbe Michaels, ial squitieri,sr, iM. Andrew Sprong, iBeth Trissel, i

  Home > Blogs Popular: Books, Stories, Articles, Poetry     

Frank P Whyte

· Become a Fan
  Notify me of new titles
  added by this author.

· 328 titles
· 1,042 Reviews
· Share with Friends!
Member Since: Feb, 2003

   My Blog
   Contact Author
   Read Reviews

· Remedies of Choice

· Hearts of Gold

Short Stories
· Limestone and Sycamores

· The Unwrapped Gift

· The Hand of Fate

· The Nun in the Glass Casket

· So You Think You Want to Write a Novel

· Managing Oral Mucositis

· Seven Reasons Why Oncology Nurses Should Get Certified

· Father's Day in the Fall

· You to Me

· And it was Only a Dream

· Honesty

· Promise

· Life

· Patience's Ways

· In the Garden of God

· A Poet's Dream

· Fathers and Daughters

· That Angelic Smile

         More poetry...

Frank P Whyte, click here to update your web pages on AuthorsDen.

Books by
Frank P Whyte

Hearts of Gold

Buy Options
Signed copy!
Barnes & Noble, more..

Remedies of Choice

Buy Options
Signed copy!
Amazon, Barnes & Noble, more..

Blogs by Frank P Whyte

The Right to Choose
8/15/2008 9:59:23 AM
Even viewing the Olympic experience is cruelly interrupted with the intrusive political commercials that currently plague us. For me, this is very stress-provoking. Although I would like to avoid the grave decision that I, as a voter must soon make, I find myself considering it often, and these are some of my thoughts.

Whatever it may suppose to be, in 2008, politics is nothing remotely close to what it should be. In its absolute and most-glorified state, politics should never be anything more than a vehicle, to allow a nation to seat a slate of elected leaders’ most-representative of the will of the people, to serve for a predefined period of time.

Politics should, in every regard, be a process that personifies honesty, for how else may a nation know the heart of its leaders, and without it, government ceases to be a democracy, and becomes a platform for despots to impose their freewheeling and individual will upon the very body of people who have given them power. This was not the intent of the framers of the Constitution.

The same can also be said of judges who exceed their purview. Judges should interpret the law, painfully and exactly, with intent to meet the burden that the Constitution imposes. Judges should not be subject to any inducement, whether it is of proffered favor, or of suggestion. The law speaks for itself and needs the judiciary only to apply it; fairly, consistently, and without regard to influence of any kind save that which was interred within it.

In 2008 it is common to be warned of the inherent evil of selecting a candidate based upon a single issue and this is most-commonly referenced with regard to abortion rights. If, however, a candidate is identified by an issue of such inherent turmoil, and an elector is consumed with the morality of this single issue, it is difficult to set aside this single article, and objectively evaluate a candidate based upon their remaining positions.

Murder is evil and society sees it as so. Murderers are prosecuted with enthusiasm and rarely punished with regret. For those who see abortion as murder there is little alternative. They cannot, driven by their own conscience, as every voter should be, accept a candidate for office who supports the interruption of a viable pregnancy for reasons other than the health of the mother, or in the case of rape, and there are those who do not accept it even then.

What then is the recourse? Recently, Catholic bishops have suggested that it is perhaps acceptable, within the confines of the Catholic faith, to vote for a candidate who supports a woman’s right to choose. The litmus test is, however, a difficult individual examination of the complete morality of the totality of a candidate for office. They state that if a potential voter sees in a candidate who supports abortion, certain redeeming characteristics that would offset their position on abortion, sufficiently that when a voter dies and enters the spirit world, he or she could make an argument to those souls who had been aborted, that would be accepted by those souls. That is as if to say “I know that abortion is inherently wrong, yet this individual, despite their support of this single issue, was so good, and their other positions were so needed for the survival of our civilization, that despite my opposition to abortion, I was still morally obliged to vote for the candidate anyway.” The burden imposed does not end there, however. The caveat is that once the aborted souls have heard the argument that they would agree with the premises suggested by the deceased voter. This is, my friends, a tall order, and in the view of spiritual persons, eternally burdensome. Fundamentalist Christians take their opposition to abortion even well-beyond this, leaving virtually no situation where the termination of a viable pregnancy is acceptable.

I believe abortion to be wrong. I have examined the arguments, and it is certainly true that I am not a woman, but I believe the interruption of pregnancy to be an evil that will, in conjunction with certain other evil practices within any society that support them, in the end destroy that society. This is the choice, and God has certainly given us the platform to make it, but in the end it will define us and that is tragic.

The systematic destruction of the weakest members of any society, and be clear that it is my contention that conceived fetuses are, indeed, members of our society, will lead to our spiritual, if not actual destruction, just as will the sanctioning of gay marriage, but that is another argument for another day. We can delude ourselves as much as we elect, but abortion is murder and murder is evil, and God, the Master of the Universe, traditionally destroys societies who espouse evil.

This argument is theoretical. I have been personally victimized by abortion, just as was my ex-wife, when at sixteen weeks, the exact gestational age of a fetus that she aborted when in high school; she spontaneously aborted six consecutive fetuses through miscarriage. Her body thought that this is what she was supposed to do with a pregnancy and the attendant upheaval in our lives was, without doubt, the chief contributory mechanism that destroyed our relationship. But I say again that this argument is theoretical. Subsequent to my personal experience, and within the confines of my spirituality, I have examined this issue, I think, from every possible viewpoint save that of being a woman who has had an abortion, and over that I have no recourse.

I ask that you drive to the country in the dead of night. Once there, gaze peacefully into the night sky, and whether or not you accept Jesus Christ as your Savior, follow the teachings of Mohammed, Yahweh, Buddha, Krishna, or any other higher power of your choosing, if you are rational, and I will give you credit for that, you will feel deeply within your bones that God is there. If He is there He is watching, and if He is watching, He is weeping.

Abortion is murder and I cannot support a candidate who espouses it. Our leadership must be moral leadership and moral leadership cannot abide the destruction of innocent souls. You can defend it and debate all of the reasons why a woman’s right to choose is sacred, but you would be wrong. All that is sacred is a woman’s right to give life, not to take it, or to allow it to be taken. Society even, in its own hypocritical way, has denounced it. If a man murders a pregnant woman, he is often subsequently prosecuted for both murders. Society then turns around and says that this same fetus, if electively terminated by the mother, has not been murdered and this makes not the first bit of sense. You cannot have it both ways.

Liberal forces are doing the same that they have always done to our society. They identify issues that outrage the populace and begin their work. Society, then, through the most insidious of processes, is desensitized to that which has outraged them. Soon the masses are able to tolerate the issue, and after having done so, are pressed to accept it. What was once forbidden is now accepted, and once accepted we are then pressed to embrace it. Once we have embraced it, those that espouse the liberal ideology identify the next new outrageous issue and go to work.

Liberalism is evil and you are the victim – you are simply too ignorant to recognize it. You are all so enthused with having the right to do whatever it is that you want to do that you have lost your ability to discern between right and wrong. That, fellow citizens, is sad indeed. Just think about the hideous reality of partial birth abortions and the certainty that one of our candidates supports even the right to terminate the lives of those viable fetuses that are born alive. If that is not murder then I do not know what is.

I support immigration, programs to support those in our society who, for one reason or another, cannot support themselves. I support universal healthcare and I agree with trying to preserve our environment. I do not, however, believe in murdering the innocents among us, and despite what some might describe as my liberal societal tendencies, could not die, transition to the spirit world and look into the eyes of the millions of souls who had been aborted, and say, ‘I’m sorry, but this is why…’.

Post a Comment

More Blogs by Frank P Whyte
•  The Right to Choose - Friday, August 15, 2008  

Authors alphabetically: A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z

Featured Authors | New to AuthorsDen? | Add AuthorsDen to your Site
Share AD with your friends | Need Help? | About us

Problem with this page?   Report it to AuthorsDen
© AuthorsDen, Inc. All rights reserved.