In the continuing discussion of the Texas heartbeat bill (SB 8), several community leaders, including David Schleicher in his Oct. 1 column, make a logical error when they deduce that since the Bible does not specifically mention the term “abortion,” therefore, this activity should be considered morally acceptable.
The Bible does not directly condemn recreational drug use, either, but its clear prohibition of drunkenness establishes a principle which applies to such illicit narcotics consumption.
Likewise, the Bible condemns the taking of all innocent, human life: “You shall do no murder” (Exodus 20:13). Thus, though the term “abortion” is not found its pages, this Biblical principle would apply to innocent, human life before birth, as well.
Schleicher acknowledges that the Bible speaks of God’s knowledge of each one of us in our mother’s wombs. Yet, the Bible speaks even more poignantly: “For it was you who created my inward parts; you knit me together in my mother’s womb” (Psalm 139:13).
This begs the question: What is being terminated (or killed) in every abortion? The scientific (and Biblical) answer is: a human being in utero (the mother’s womb).
If we would not justify the intentional taking of an innocent, human life, already born, for convenience, economic, or social reasons, how can we justify taking a human life inside the womb for similar reasons?
Finally, we should note that though abortion and infant abandonment were common, even legal, in ancient Roman and Greek cultures, Jewish law forbade such actions. Additionally, early, first-century Christians were forbidden to practice abortion in the clear teachings of the “Didache,” one of the first published statements of Christian ethical concerns.
Christian history and Christian Scripture both come down on the side of protecting innocent, human life — from conception through natural death. This shows respect for the imago Dei — the image of God in each human soul.
Warren Fain, Waco
No on bond
In Sunday’s Waco Trib there was an article about the upcoming $355 million WISD bond vote. Part of the money is for building a new Waco High School.
I toured the Waco High School building several years ago as part of a 50-year Richfield High reunion. The building appeared to be in excellent condition. I am not a building inspector but because it is now fully air-conditioned, it seems to be in even better condition than when I attended and it was new. The only reason given for scrapping the building is supposed repairs over the years. The building does not appear “antiquated” at all, and do we seriously believe that repairs will cost the $151 million that replacing Waco High will?
Students should not have to inherit a dilapidated building, which Waco High is not, and a new building will not ensure better learning. One of the oldest buildings at Harvard dates back to the Revolutionary War.
The easiest thing a school board can do is spend money on buildings. Suppose the money proposed for the new high school was actually used for the education of students. I can’t speak to the need for the other buildings, but unless the school board can show it will improve the education of students I believe we should oppose the current bond proposal.
Crawford Long, Waco