Skip to main content

An Open Letter to Lena Dunham

Lena,

I have never heard your name before today. I had no idea who you were, and no idea what you stood for. I did not know about your background, nor did I care. Today, this has changed. I now know your name, and I know what you stand for and what you stand against. I wanted to take the time to write a short letter addressing the things that you have said. I realize that you will likely never see this letter. Even if you do, it is unlikely that you will take the time to try to understand things from my perspective. That is fine. That is your choice, and I will respect that. What I cannot respect is the mass murder of innocent children. You refer to this as abortion.

You have stated that there is a stigma that goes along with abortion, and that you feel as though you have added to this stigma by not having an abortion yourself. All due respect, I think that you are missing the point. A stigma is defined as "a mark of disgrace associated with a particular circumstance, quality, or person" (1). I would like you to notice that a stigma can be a good thing or a bad thing, depending on what it is associated with. Let me clarify this by listing a few things that have a stigma about them:

1.) Theft

2.) Vandalism
3.) Murder
4.) Hatred
5.) Racism
6.) Destruction
7.) Child Abuse
8.) Spousal Abuse
9.) Tyranny
10.) Torture

These 10 things have a stigma about them. Does this mean that we should go out and take part in these things so that the stigma will go away? By no means. It is a very good thing that there is a stigma associated with these things. Otherwise, we may all become moral monsters. Just because a stigma is associated with an issue does not make this issue good. But this forces us to ask a question: Is abortion good on the basis of its own merits? The fact that science now tells us that, from the moment of conception, an embryo is a human being and that abortion ends the life of this human being should be enough to answer this question. Abortion is murder. Nothing more, nothing less. The fact that you would advocate for such an atrocious thing demonstrates the hatred that is within your own heart.


Why do you think that there is such a cultural stigma around abortion? Do you believe that people in our culture are just so full of hatred because they view baby-killing in a negative light? No, we are not full of hatred, and we are correct to abhor the mass-murder of children. We are not the moral monster that you have become. Nor will we be. We will not become the monster that calls for the murder of any race of people, as you have. Nor will we become the monster who says that we have to eliminate the stigma surrounding the murder of innocent children (also called abortion).


If you have decided to become, and remain, a moral monster, I cannot change you. You have made a decision that will affect your very conscience for the rest of your life. I cannot change you. Only Christ can do that. I will, however, offer you something that you, as a moral monster, cannot offer me. I will treat you like a human being. This is something that you can never offer, because it requires something you will never have. I will treat you like a human, because my core values and my faith demand it. So keep up the hatred, if you so desire. For my part, I will continue to pray that Christ shows you what true compassion means. He will show you, if only you will let Him. But be warned, He will change your life.


Sincerely,

Travis Stockelman

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

5 Things That Are Best Explained By Theism

When discussing my faith with non-believers, I find that the average person is oblivious to the explanatory scope of theism. That is, God's existence explains several things that would be difficult to explain in any other way. In this post, I am not presenting any formal arguments, but am just pointing out what these things are. Arguments will be addressed in subsequent posts.

1. The Origin of the Universe

Neither atheism, nor alternative views of God can adequately explain the origin of the universe. Modern science has lead us to the conclusion that the space-time universe that we inhabit had a definite beginning some 14 billion years ago (give or take a little). The problem for the atheist comes when we realize that any contingent thing has an explanation for its existence that is not found within itself, and that if something had a beginning or could have failed to exist (which describes the universe), it is by its very nature contingent. Neither do other views of God adequatel…

7 Problems With "Lack-Theism" Atheism

In recent years, atheists have increasingly attempted to redefine the words "atheism" and "atheist". Now, rather than being the negative position on the question of God's existence, many atheists have redefined atheism to be a mere "lack of belief" in God. They do not seem to care that there was already a term for this position ("non-theism"). This is often done in an attempt to avoid the burden of proof that comes from taking the negative position on God's existence. Yet, in attempting to eliminate this burden of proof, the one who redefines atheism in this manner has jumped from the frying pan into the fire. Here are 7 reasons why this definition of atheism is problematic for those who use this definition:

1. It Is Rooted In The Etymological Fallacy

In order to justify this redefinition, many atheists will appeal to the etymology of the word "atheist." The term "atheist" comes from two Greek roots, "a-" me…

Why Does God Condemn Homosexuality?

Q: Why would God create someone as a homosexual and then condemn them to hell for all eternity for it?

A: This is a question that I have heard more than one person ask. I suspect that there are more who want to ask this question, but have not had the courage to ask me. I think it is important that we clarify a few points before we go any further. Let me begin this post by making a distinction between a person's sexual orientation and their actions. A person's sexual orientation is the individual's preference. A person can engage in actions contrary to their preference. Thus, we must draw a distinction between the two.

It is also vital that we understand what the Bible actually condemns. The reason that I drew the distinction above is so that I can make this point: the Bible does not condemn a person's orientation. My challenge to anyone on either side of this debate is to find a passage of Scripture that clearly condemns a person's orientation. Such a passage does n…