|
||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Last Updated:Thursday - 07/15/2010June 25, 2007
WCR Letters to the Editor
Aborted babies deserve dignityI'm writing to comment on a letter regarding Bishop Fred Henry's disagreement with the approach of the Genocide Awareness Project ("Graphic fetal photos tell the story," WCR Letters, May 28). I whole-heartedly support Bishop Henry's decision. He gave a strong and wholesome defence and explanation for his stance about the violation to those aborted babies. Using a means that violates the dignity of those aborted babies contradicts their entire goal to begin with, and therefore will not have long lasting effects. Furthermore, the letter writer's attempts to defend her position also falter in using the vision of hell or the crucifix. Hell is not part of the Body of Christ, and therefore cannot be used to argue against the "respect that inherently must be accorded" to the aborted babies. And if we understand the use of the crucifix we can determine that it's very different than an image of an aborted baby. The crucifix is an image of God's love and our salvation. While we all should know that both the crucified Christ and an aborted baby were murdered, Christ's bloody sacrifice of himself was willfully given to reveal divine love and to redeem us. Aborted babies, however, did not willingly sacrifice themselves, so those graphic images do not reveal love. Furthermore, they are not signs of our salvation. I strongly suggest she ponders Bishop Henry's advice, and I think their group would be far more effective if they dig deeper and fight the root causes of abortion. Janette Bilodeau
|
|||||||||||||||
Copyright © 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009 -- Western Catholic ReporterOur mission: To serve our readers by bringing the Gospel to bear on current issues in the Church and in secular culture through accurate news coverage and reflective commentary. |
||||||||||||||||