Three Women Pregnant With Cloned Babies

Paul Prescod
Wed, 24 Apr 2002 17:24:51 -0700

Gordon Mohr wrote:
> I did not say I expected any particular response, but there
> is a potential tension.

No, I think Lindsey made a good case that very few fundamentalist
believe the sins of the mother justify the killing of the child.

> I know that some people against abortion make exceptions for
> cases where the pregnancy resulted from rape or incest. Apparently,
> these offspring (or the circumstances of their conception) are
> considered so abominable that abortion is allowable.

Rather, some people are against abortion in a kind of emotional, not
morally considered way and can be convinced that the potential damage to
the mother of the birth is sufficient to make the abortion alright. Can
you find a pro-choice theologian that will be similarly confused? I
would be surprised.

"Clearly, God detests rape and incest, as well as any other form of
sexual immorality. Yet nowhere does He condemn the offspring of sexual
immorality.4 Rather, they are the recipients of blessing. Moab and
Ben-ammi, the sons of Lot and his daughters, grew into mighty nations.
Perez, the son of Judah and his daughter-in-law, stands in the blessing
on Ruth and in the genealogy of Christ. In fact, God stresses the
principle that "Fathers shall not be put to death for their children,
nor children put to death for their fathers; each is to die for his own
sin" (Deut. 24:16)."

> I would not be surprised to see some (but not all or most)
> abortion opponents making the same allowance for cloned
> fetuses, especially if they believe such clones are in
> some way unnatural or exist in contravention to the will
> of god.

Maybe a tiny fraction. I think you wanted to trap people you don't like
into some kind of a paradox and it turns out that there is no paradox at
all. The manner of conception can be immoral and yet the life created
would still be valuable.

 Paul Prescod