Brett's Discernment

W&M alum, like moi!

Anyway - watching the Daily Show, and the author of The Party of Death is arguing with Jon Stewart about the right to life issue. Jon is trying to argue that in the book he puts people on the defensive by using such aggressive rhetoric, like "the party of death," and makes right to life issues (abortion, but also stem cells, end of life decisions, etc) so definitive, without any grey area. He is trying to say there's some grey area . . . And this man is sticking right to his principals, which is admirable in the sense, though I would say he is "wrong" because of how viscerally and instinctually I disagree with him. But he won't give any ground that there is any grey area . . . So Jon says - if you think about it, then, it comes down to that you won't trade a life even if there is a just cause for people involved (like rape victims)? And he responds no . . . To which Jon pertly replied - well, isn't that the very justification that the right uses to defend the Iraq war? For taking the lives of the Iraqis involved?

I think he got him there.

Now, conversely, I would definitely call myself a pacifist, because I do value our God-given life. I personally am pro-choice. There are many reasons, too many to list here. I am also personally against the death penalty (which is a fairly new change of opinion) because of my faith, and I pray for the forgiveness in the hearts of those affected by offenders of these crimes.

I pray for my students every day, and I think about how God works in their lives. He does amazing things. I am working on getting better about bringing my faith into the classroom, not explicitly necessarily, but just by being more mindful of not letting unkindness slip, and trying to show as much patience as possible.