Letters

Self-defeating strategies

To the Editor:

I am responding to David Mainse's address to the National Pro-Life Conference, as reported in the August Interim.

I admire Mr. Mainse for his relentless missionary work for evangelization. During the NPLC, however, he suggested that people should vote for "electable pro-life candidates - even if they work for mainline parties that are pro-abortion ... to prevent a ‘splintering' of the pro-life vote."

He may not realize that Christians and pro-lifers are already politically divided. They are voting for three major parties which are not Christian oriented in their policies, and which actively support abortion. This is the primary reason why we have lost every political decision that has had to do with morality since 1969. The only pro-life party in Ontario (the Family Coalition Party) is working hard to correct this situation and unite all pro-life, pro-family people in Ontario under one umbrella.

Mr. Mainse may not realize that all pro-abortion political parties promote different facets of the same secular ideas. They are parties whose objective is only to be re-elected. They are parties in which good, principled, pro-life and family-oriented politicians are at best an inconsequential minority. These politicians cannot vote against party policy and still remain politically significant.

Mr. Mainse suggested that we should vote for good "electable" candidates (by human measures provided to us through a secular media), but this divisive, self-defeating and worn political strategy has gotten us where we are today.

As an evangelical preacher, he might better urge Christians to vote according to their consciences, and for the party and party policies that best represent Christian principles. He should not give up on our candidates so easily, for they witness for the traditional values of God and family.

With God's help we will prevail and provide people with a true alternative, so that they will not have to deny their faith with their vote. I wish Mr. Mainse the best for his television ministry, and hope that he will be able to help us by giving the FCP a sliver of the free publicity that the secular media grants to the pro-abortion parties.

Giuseppe Gori
Leader Family Coalition Party of Ontario

Article exciting

To the Editor:

The article by Paul Swope in the July issue, "Abortion: A failure to communicate," really excited me, because it was so much in line with my thinking. I gather that I am not alone and that many could see that we need a change of language and approach in order to get the pro-life message out to those who need so much to hear it.

We must understand that others think differently than pro-lifers do. It is therefore not surprising that they make choices that are revolting to us. Paul Swope suggests a more gentle approach, which does not mean weakening our position. We must stand firm in our conviction that all human life is sacred, and bring that message to those hardened by a materialistic society that has forgotten what love is all about.

In all my writings, I promote respect for the dignity and sanctity of human life. We all want that and are receptive to that message. Pro-life is much more than fighting abortion. As Paul Swope brought to the forefront, there is much more involved than the baby. A positive message will give us good results. "Celebrate life in its beauty" was the theme of our latest seminar organized by Alex Schadenberg and Bishop Sherlock of London diocese.

I urge everyone to obtain the July issue of The Interim. If acted upon, Paul Swope's ideas and those of the Caring Foundation would give the pro-life movement a boost that will make us surge ahead.

Adrian A. Keet
Ingersoll, Ont.

People confused

To the Editor:

My blood boils when I hear Christians use that time-worn statement, "I am against abortion except ..." etc.

It would seem as if most are still confused in their thinking about what abortion is. It is the killing of defenceless human beings, our brothers and sisters in Christ. Most seem to allow the biased and anti-life media to influence their thinking. If you want to know the truth about abortion, get the facts from the many pro-life sources that exist, not the secular media.

Do you know any Commandment that contains a clause? Did Christ only die for those conceived in holy matrimony, and not for those conceived in rape or incest? For the healthy and not the handicapped? The war on abortion would have been won long ago if Christians had awakened from their lethargy and fence-sitting and helped save babies. Look how evil appears to be triumphing, while good Christians do nothing. Look at the unjust, immoral laws being passed with increasing frequency.

Do you know that hospitals, except a few denominational ones, are being purged of healthcare professionals who refuse to be party to murder? Some are being asked questions about that before being hired. Some nurses have been fired or forced out.

We can't all be a Linda Gibbons, Joan Andrews, Joe Scheidler, or one of those many more unsung heroes who give so much of themselves to help save babies. But we can all help in some way.

We all have the privilege to vote, to make a difference, yet time after time we elect anti-life politicians who use our money to kill more babies. How many take part in the annual Life Chain, support pro-life organizations, or volunteer some time to help them?

Why are we surprised by the violence in our society, especially among the very young? Children learn from the examples their elders have given them. We have doctors who have killed hundreds of babies, and are looked on as pillars of society, yet when some poor confused teenager panics and kills her baby, the media and the public can't wait to banish her from society permanently.

As we approach the year 2000, I challenge all Christians to think seriously of what they can do to end legalized abortion. Think of the time when you will stand before God - for many sooner than later - and He will say to you: "I was hungry and you did not feed Me; about to be killed and you did not lift a finger to stop it." You will answer, "But Lord, I was not born yet when You were crucified." And He will say, "Neither were these."

"Amen, I say to you, as long as you did it not to one of these least, neither did you do it to Me."

M. Griffith
North York, Ont.

Biblical support

To the Editor:

The Bible contains many verses that support the pro-life position. But there is another way the Bible (indirectly) indicates that abortion is wrong. Allow me to present it to you.

Raw-Kham is the Hebrew word for "compassion." It is found in several passages in the Old Testament, such as Isaiah 49:15 and Jeremiah 1:5. Rakh-am and rekh-em are two Hebrew words for "womb" that are found in many Old Testament passages.

Strong's Bible Concordance and Lexicon informs us that the two Hebrew words for womb derive from the Hebrew word for compassion. The message implicit in this is that the womb is to be a place of compassion for the unborn. This completely rules out abortion.

Joseph Grace
Burkeville, Va., U.S.A.

Faint hope

To the Editor:

In May of this year, I photocopied some graphic photos of fully-formed, aborted babies, plus artists' drawings of the ghastly, near-birth, stabbing-then-de-braining "procedure" in more humane times known as infanticide.

I mailed these images to several dozen MPs and, in a covering letter, implored them to look hard at the grisly scenes and try to get a feel for the excruciating pain the babies endured before death ended their agony. The law says that pets are to be drugged before death; no such mercy is shown to human babies!

I tried to reach the MPs: "Is there not one among you whose conscience impels him or her to rise in the House and propose a personhood bill in defense of these scorned ones? You are their last hope." It is a faint hope. From among dozens of MPs came five replies. Allan Rock's was a rambling non-sequitur; the others were typical of pro-lifers who fear risk.

Oh, I understand well politicians' reticence. Their earthbound goal is power and financial reward, in that order. It is the 30-year-long, tongue-tied stance of the mass of Canada's clergy, in the face of a demographic slaughter, that causes me pain and puzzlement. What, I am emboldened to ask, is their goal, and/or excuse?

Aileen M. Sivell
Burlington, Ont.