Comments on: Discovering Common Ground

By: nipple toys

nipple toys — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 11:16:12 +0000

A pro-life/anti-abortion stance does exist among secularists without its source or inspiration being found rooted in religious belief. Whether a secular case can be made against abortion is the topic of this debate.

By: nipple toys

nipple toys — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 09:16:12 +0000

By: Isis

Isis — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 17:36:01 +0000

I totally agree with you!

Rina

By: WitnessforPeace

WitnessforPeace — Sat, 23 May 2009 00:53:48 +0000

Wellput. I could agree with much of what was said, and said so well, if it didn't have a disturbing “Let's make everything a grey area and do as we please” tinge to it. But letjusticerolldown's critique was better. “innocent little voices of ambiguity, mystery, doubt and humility seeking common ground.
“

By: WitnessforPeace

WitnessforPeace — Fri, 22 May 2009 19:48:36 +0000

Good point—Christianity and Confucianism do have much in common, including an emphasis on family. But that falls far short of proving universality, unfortunately. Peacemaking appears to be absent from Wahabism and many other sects. As cultures intermingle, there should be LESS conflict, not more, if peacemaking were really universal. Surely nations as religious as India and Pakistan shouldn't be locked in perpetual, nuclear armed combat, but they are. I wish you were right, but I still disagree.
God has given “Common Grace” to each human, leading some to conclude that we are basically good. But we aren't, and that's not just reflected in individuals such as myself who don't walk the talk, but also in belief systems that are radically at variance with God's Grace.
Blessings,

By: WitnessforPeace

WitnessforPeace — Fri, 22 May 2009 19:19:07 +0000

Well put-that has certainly been my experience: asking questions leads to stronger faith. Naturally some questions remain difficult. Why is their so much suffering?
When does life begin? Conception? Implantation? I don't have any special insight on that one-just the very ordinary insight that wanted babies are given names, people look at their ultrasound pictures; none of the friends and family of wanted babies ever worry that they are deluding themselves by pretending that this baby is alive. It starts with the pregnancy test—maybe that's when life begins When parents talk to their children in utero they don't ordinarily say “Hi Foetus, Daddy and Mommy love you”
So by denying that an unwanted baby is human, they are in denial about what they themselves plainly believe. The fact that our culture enables this shows that respect for human life as something special is eroding.
Thanks for asking and Blessings to all who read this,

By: squeaky

squeaky — Fri, 22 May 2009 17:19:45 +0000

Actually, my question about Christians having doubts was not related to abortion. It was a bigger, but more general question than that. I tend to think that doubt begets faith, so doubt is not a bad thing. I'm also reacting to a time in my life when the dominant teaching was that if you doubt, your faith is lacking, and therefore, you are a bad Christian…that was what was behind my question.

But, onto the abortion debate–You seem to be implying that pro-choice advocates don't share our universal valuing of human life. Is that what you mean?

By: Carrpe_Diem

Carrpe_Diem — Fri, 22 May 2009 11:51:40 +0000

What is common in all major religions is the Golden Rule. The two greatest commandments in Christianity are Golden Rule based. Confucius spoke of the Golden Rule 500 years befor Christ. thus, I submit peacemaking has its roots in the Golden Rule and is universal.

By: hammerud

hammerud — Fri, 22 May 2009 11:38:32 +0000

I am not saying we should not have compassion for misguided people,
particularly many of our young people, but I don't have compassion for
people who have capacity to know better.

By: letjusticerolldown

letjusticerolldown — Fri, 22 May 2009 01:32:19 +0000

It is interesting how this theme has kept cropping up in the posts on this blog. Frankly, it feels like in Obama's speech Jim found comfortable language to really forward a rather aggressive assault on certainty and dogma. I understand all the counterpoints about mystery, uncertainty, pluralism, ambiguity, humility, common ground, etc. etc.

I am not even disputing the points. But I think the picture is a bit incomplete without acknowledging that from a broad cultural perspective there is a rejection of authority and dogma. To a degree I join the assault when these things become idols to worship. But I think it a delusion to think the worldviews, principalities, powers, spiritualities, etc. that seek its destruction are but innocent little voices of ambiguity, mystery, doubt and humility seeking common ground.

I agree with the tone and objective of Obama and Wallis around issues of common ground, possibilities, problem-solving, shared values, dialogue, responsibilitiy, etc. I do not agree the way they triangle in much of the faith community in a way that is something of a 'slap-down'.

If he got up at Notre Dame and said, "I may be wrong about abortion. I will study Catholic teaching and ask the Catholic congressional persons to study with me to review our position," the whole humility thing would take on more meaning to me.

By: JaneinWNY

JaneinWNY — Fri, 22 May 2009 01:30:02 +0000

“I would hope abortion would not be a “difficult moral question” for anyone with a capacity for even minimal depth of thought.”

That may be the most demeaning post I've ever read from a so-called Christian. Please carry on banging your head against a wall and wondering why nobody will listen to you.

By: Finding Common Ground in Tough Issues Related to Faith « Road to Priesthood

Finding Common Ground in Tough Issues Related to Faith « Road to Priesthood — Fri, 22 May 2009 00:22:48 +0000

[...] Read on as Jim Wallis weighs in on the question. [...]

By: hammerud

hammerud — Thu, 21 May 2009 23:07:04 +0000

Each of us is the unique product of generations. None of us know whether or not we are the product of a rape somewhere along the line. Killing an innocent human being does not correct any wrong. By the way, morality is legislated. It is called the law.

By: paradoxtor

paradoxtor — Thu, 21 May 2009 22:38:29 +0000

“Maybe we won’t agree on abortion, but we can still agree that this heart-wrenching decision for any woman is not made casually; it has both moral and spiritual dimensions. So let us work together to reduce the number of women seeking abortions; let’s reduce unintended pregnancies. Let’s make adoption more available. Let’s provide care and support for women who do carry their children to term. Let’s honor the conscience of those who disagree with abortion, and draft a sensible conscience clause …”

What if Obama had said, “Maybe we won’t agree on torture, but we can still agree that this heart-wrenching decision for any leader is not made casually; it has both moral and spiritual dimensions. So let us work together to reduce the need for torture; let’s reduce civilian casulties. Let’s make orther options more available. Let’s provide care and support for those harmed because we choose not to torture. Let’s honor the conscience of military or CIA men/women who disagree with torture, and draft a sensible conscience clause …”

By: gjkbear822

gjkbear822 — Thu, 21 May 2009 22:22:45 +0000

I am discouraged when I see so many comments who don't believe that there is any middle ground or any room for discussion about abortion. I could never have one; but I don't live anyone else's life and there are so many gray areas.
The one that I saw recently was the little 9 year old, raped by her father, became pregnant with twins. At 9 the doctors said that she would die and the babies also because her uterus was just not developed enough. 9 years old. Just a child. Would you have had her carry those babies, and give her life? What great sin could she have committed at age 9 to warrant the agony and eventual demise of herself and those twins? Is she not blameless? The Pope excommunicated the mother, because she chose to have an abortion for her 9 year old. He said nothing about the scumbag father – I assume he is still in a state of grace.
If this had been YOUR 9 year old, would you still have your same stance on abortion? I don't think I could.
There is room for common ground – changing the cycle of poverty would help; education would help & deciding what to do with the children who are born would help. Certainly these are things apart from abortion that people could agree on – but all you guys seem to want to dwell on is the sin of abortion. For some of you, Pres. Obama will never do enough – never make the grade and never receive a good mark – something will always be lacking.
Morality should not ever be legislated.

By: hammerud

hammerud — Thu, 21 May 2009 22:16:11 +0000

You end by saying, “President Obama laid out a strong and positive vision for how people of faith, and the nation as a whole, can work together to face the most difficult moral questions.” I would hope abortion would not be a “difficult moral question” for anyone with a capacity for even minimal depth of thought. I would think President Obama might have that capacity so his stand on the issue is more than a little disturbing.

By: ando

ando — Thu, 21 May 2009 21:11:39 +0000

Funny how Sojourners is mobilized to “end” poverty, but seeks to find common ground on “reducing” abortion.

By: Eric77

Eric77 — Thu, 21 May 2009 20:43:54 +0000

“In the end, the President's comments were entirely about how Americans should discuss or debate abortion. There was no serious consideration of abortion itself. President Obama merely talked about talking about abortion….

“If President Obama had actually spoken of abortion itself, rather than addressing abortion only as an issue of controversy, he would have found himself defending the indefensible, which explains why he avoids this discussion at all costs.”

Insightful words...

By: WitnessforPeace

WitnessforPeace — Thu, 21 May 2009 19:49:00 +0000

That last sentence should read:
“But let's not kid ourselves about what others believe by projecting the best of Judeo-Christian values on other cultures”
And I should also add that Princeton's Peter Singer comes from Western culture as well, although he is contradicting our Judeo-Christian heritage by esteeming animal life as more valuable than one month old human babies.

By: WitnessforPeace

WitnessforPeace — Thu, 21 May 2009 19:42:55 +0000

Of course Christians have doubts. But if they are following Jesus, they will do the work to resolve them as much as possible. In other words, honest doubters seek answers revealed from God, without using doubt as a shield for their preference for answers that differ from what God has said. An example of ungodly doubt comes right out of the Hebrew Scriptures “Did God REALLY say….” The right answer was “Yes, he did” not “Hmmm, I guess that's a gray area and whatever I do is right for me.”
My problem with the speech is the “universal” vs. “parochial” Peacemaking, for example, is not a universal principal. Sentimentalists like to say it is. The value of human life isn't universal, either; it springs from the belief that God is the Creator, and he created significant individuals, male and female, in his image. We ARE of more value than sparrows. That is NOT a universal concept. We in the West have had trouble following it, yet it comes from our “parochial” Judeo-Christian heritage, not from the sentimental, and false, thought that all religions are the same.
That said, common ground is still a possibility, and I like the part about “not demonizing” opponents. But we shouldn't lie about what others see as the source of ultimate value either by projecting our own heritage in a sentimental manner.