preview

Effects Of Tomlinson's Argument On The Status Of Unborn Children

Decent Essays
The status of an unborn child is still unclear--at least to me. Tomlinson's argument is not really persuasive. Just from a practical standpoint, the protected embryos have a good chance of surviving a fire if help arrives in time. Even if engulfed in flames, the container for the embryos provides that the five-year-old does not have.
But the Bible makes this issue a bit murky. Children were not spared, born or unborn, among those Canaanite tribes that God devoted to destruction--what is referred to as the Ban (Herem). Moreover, when Judah impregnated Tamar, thinking his widowed daughter-in-law was a prostitute, he became enraged when he discovered her pregnancy. He called for her to be burned for her sexual immorality. He was stopped, however, by the pledges she produced that proved that he was the father.
Judah affirms that Tamar was more righteous than he, presumably because Judah did not keep his promise to give her his younest son as husband. But there is no comment about the children he would have
…show more content…
If not, she would be unharmed. Whatever this water was, it sounds as if it induced an abortion chemically. The prenatal child, however, is the result of adult misbehavior yet earns a sentence of death. That is a curious thing for a pro-life God to do. Yet again, this is not a pro-life story.
Of course, some argue that God is immoral for doing these things. That is not my point here. I am suggesting that the Bible does not really set forth a consistent pro-life position. God commands the killing of both the foetuses and the infants of enemies. On occasion, he is OK with miscarrying the infants of Israel. In short, the pro-life views of today do not find consistent support in the Bible. The cultures are just too different, yet the Bible is the
    Get Access