tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post4728389441036964092..comments2024-03-27T17:15:37.606-04:00Comments on Triablogue: Assessing AHARyanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17809283662428917799noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-319917118179646652013-05-01T10:01:27.154-04:002013-05-01T10:01:27.154-04:00We have since refined our position on this, and sh...<i>We have since refined our position on this, and should probably take that older article down.</i><br /><br />D'oh; I was the one who provided Steve that link. My mistake for forgetting about the latter, clarificatory articles.Rhologyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14245825667079220242noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-722498751516407622013-04-30T19:41:38.556-04:002013-04-30T19:41:38.556-04:00I think one objective of AHA is to force nominally...<i>I think one objective of AHA is to force nominally prolife politicians who pay lipservice to the prolife cause by casting free votes and rhetorically posturing to actually do something that makes a difference. Take effective action.</i><br /><br />This is also correct. We hold to a "no compromise" position out of principle, but we also believe that such a stance will have the effect of moving professing pro-life politicians who do not hold this stance to become more serious in fulfilling their stated goals of protecting the life of the unborn.<br /><br /><i>I’m not qualified to comment on that negative assessment. And I don’t think prolife organizations like the Life Training Institute are a waste of time and money. It’s doing important work by intellectually equipping believers.</i><br /><br />We don't believe that all pro-life organizations are a complete waste of time and resources. Our main concerns with the pro-life movement in general are found in our "five tenets" of abolitionism, which set us apart from other groups. These are outlined here:<br /><br />http://abolishhumanabortion.com/about/who-we-are/<br /><br />A general concern that we have with non-abolitionist pro-life organizations is that we believe many of them "shoot themselves in the foot" by compromising in various ways, and are thus much less effective in the fighst against abortion than they could otherwise be.<br /><br /><i>The aggressive tactics of AHA is doubtless a turnoff for some people. However, I suspect that AHA is borrowing a page from other activists, agitators, and pressure groups. Jewish, Black, and Latino activists, LGBT activists, feminists, environmentalists, animal rights activists, and food police employ confrontational, in-your-face tactics which may be off-putting, but are also quite successful in advancing their respective causes. So AHA may feel the same basic approach should be deployed in the interests of the babies.</i><br /><br />I don't think we generally think of aggressiveness in terms of borrowing from other modern activists. Our motivation comes mainly from desiring to follow the example of certain godly men in Scripture (such as Jeremiah and John the Baptist) who took an uncompromising stand against the evils of their day. We seek to be bold in our proclamation of truth, but this is probably more than anything because we are unashamed of it, and believe that the world needs to hear it. But though we seek to be bold, we do not want to be overbearing either. We believe that both Eph. 5:11 and Phi. 4:5 are true and applicable, and we seek to live in such a way as to be faithful to both.<br /><br /><i>But elsewhere, AHA does make allowance for therapeutic abortions, narrowly defined:<br /><br />http://blog.abolishhumanabortion.com/2011/05/what-we-mean-when-we-say-abortion.html<br /><br />So I probably agree with AHA.</i><br /><br />We have since refined our position on this, and should probably take that older article down. Our current position on this issue can be found here:<br /><br />http://blog.abolishhumanabortion.com/2012/08/abortion-and-life-of-mother.html<br />http://blog.abolishhumanabortion.com/2012/08/defining-abortion-as-intentional.html<br /><br />We believe that everything that can be done should be done to save the lives of both the mother and her unborn child in life-threatening situations. However, we would distinguish between medical procedures that are expressly designed to kill the fetus (e.g. by ripping him into pieces) from those that are not. We would not call the latter "abortions" when performed in an attempt to give both mother and unborn child the best possible chance at life.Matthew C. Martellushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06674090990305919761noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-68788698522209327412013-04-30T19:39:51.745-04:002013-04-30T19:39:51.745-04:00Steve,
Thank you for taking an even-handed approa...Steve,<br /><br />Thank you for taking an even-handed approach to assessing our ideology. Given the recent attacks upon our ideology and practice, this is quite refreshing.<br /><br /><i>I don’t have an in-depth knowledge of AHA, so this is very provisional.</i><br /><br />If you desire to hear it "straight from the horse's mouth," so to speak, either Alan or I will be glad to discuss the issues and answer any questions you might have. Also, we have a number of responses to recent attacks in the works that should clarify our position a bit further.<br /><br />I do not speak for all abolitionists, but I believe that those I know best (who have been with AHA from the beginning and are responsible for the development of the ideology) would agree with the points of clarification I offer below.<br /><br /><i>However, I think AHA distinguishes between thinking that incremental results are likely going to be the way it goes, and incremental changes being our aim.</i><br /><br />This is correct. Our anti-incrementalist stance flows from the belief that abortion is sin, and sin ought to be repented of immediately. However, we also realize that repentance in practice is often a process, and involves taking steps to turn away from sin. But even though we realize that repentance will probably involve steps in many cases, that doesn't mean our aim is partial repentance.<br /><br />Our main emphasis at the moment is not political (though we have participated in political action, such as being a part of the personhood petition initiative that was struck down by the Oklahoma supreme court last year), though we do hope to become more involved in the political arena as 2016 approaches. Our main focus right now is to make (intellectual and spiritual) war upon the worldview that makes child sacrifice acceptable, and take an uncompromising position that abortion is sin. We also seek to encourage and exhort our fellow brothers and sisters in Christ to likewise take such a stand. <br /><br />We believe that political efforts will likely be successful only when the culture as a whole has changed. We believe that the Gospel has the power to do this, and so are our efforts are largely an attempt to demolish arguments and lofty pretensions raised up against the knowledge of God, and to subvert our culture with the truth of God's Word.<br /><br /><i>We also need to distinguish between “compromise in reference to process and compromise in reference to principle. Compromising on strategy and tactics is not a moral compromise. Strategy and tactics are means to an end, not an end in themselves. These are inherently pragmatic and adaptable.</i><br /><br />We are not necessarily opposed to using various strategies and tactics in the political arena, as long as we are convinced that we can employ such tactics and strategies in a manner consistent with our principles. This will likely be a topic of further discussion the closer we get to 2016. Right now, however, we are focused on hashing out the practical details of our involvement in other areas.<br /><br /><i>Problem is, you don’t know in advance what is doable until you try to do it, so I think it’s better to just do as much as you can rather than aiming for an abstract target. The goal should be do accomplish as much as you can every year.</i><br /><br />This is how we function in practice. We seek to be faithful to Christ with our time and resources, and trust God to use our efforts, in His providence, to effect the abolition of abortion at whatever time He has decreed in eternity past to do it. Matthew C. Martellushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06674090990305919761noreply@blogger.com