In objection and contrast to Keith Moore’s doctrinal claims in Maine Voices (“Unborn children deserve legal protection” June 4), the New Testament’s Christian message is that of compassion and love. The biblical Jesus would approach a woman’s abortion decision with compassion for the woman’s spiritual well-being, both in the difficult present caused by her pregnancy, and a future that could be unfortunate in circumstance for her and for a child if forced to term.
Her spiritual potential to experience God’s love and compassion would be the biblical Jesus’ criteria concerning her choice. The issue of the status of a fertilized egg, so central to theological speculation and absolutism by forced-birth adherents (and never mentioned in the New Testament), would not be relevant to Jesus’ concerns or his Christian message. Jesus’ biblical ministry supported the troubled and downtrodden.
His example was followed by his followers. Apostle Peter chose to preach and stay with tanners of animal hides (Acts 9:43), a lower class shunned by society because of their profession.
Moore’s focus on a Talmudic question to which he presumes to know God’s prioritization of an egg verses an actual person in being leaves Christ’s central message behind.
Charles Remmel
Portland
Send questions/comments to the editors.
Success. Please wait for the page to reload. If the page does not reload within 5 seconds, please refresh the page.
Enter your email and password to access comments.
Hi, to comment on stories you must . This profile is in addition to your subscription and website login.
Already have a commenting profile? .
Invalid username/password.
Please check your email to confirm and complete your registration.
Only subscribers are eligible to post comments. Please subscribe or login first for digital access. Here’s why.
Use the form below to reset your password. When you've submitted your account email, we will send an email with a reset code.