<p><strong>To the editor:</strong></p><p>In a March 21 response to my letter to the editor ("Society on dangerous path in deeming which lives are worthy, " March 4), Lisa Voiles asserted that I was a bit heavy for some ‘on the Bible thumping.’ She also made assertions that, for some, were a bit pejorative, asserting that ‘the fervent evangelical and pro-life supporters’ were in the political camp of President Trump, and that my views and those of the fervent folks were negated or should be questioned by the accusation that they were sufficiently neglectful of illegal border-crossing folks’ children, and of bowing at the altar of hypocrisy where children have been diminished by a list of real evils.</p><p>She attempts to distinguish unborn and newly born children from those who are ‘living,’ assuming that I and others have a disregard for the ‘living’, as some in demonstrable fact disregard the ‘not-so-living’ children. A reading of my letter clearly states my view.</p><p>I own the mention of the Bible and its views on prohibiting the sacrifice of children to appease the deities of fertility, both in antiquity and today. I did not believe I was ‘thumping;’ my theological training did not include that subject. Unfortunately, many folks of progressive and atheistic persuasions errantly believe or fervently wish that the Bill of Rights restrict the expression of religious beliefs or information in matters of public discourse.</p><p>Those implications suggested that I and all people of fervently held beliefs should tone it down, perhaps to nothing. Postmodern thought, the prevalent world view of most progressives, tends to reject revelation, such as the Bible, as relevant. But it also rejects rational thought and established facts as well.</p><p>I offer no apology for my public statements about the contents of the Bible or of their relevance to the issues of today. She may be right; her worldview and that of people of faith may be so different as to be irreconcilable in some significant ways, including the value they hold for every human life.</p><p>Ms. Voiles’ (mis)characterizations do not negate the cognitive and social dissonance within our pluralistic society at large, nor even within the secular community. I do not believe National Geographic has a theological axe to grind; nothing in the article indicated the value judgments it made were based on any biblical or pro-life view.</p><p>The remainder of Ms. Voiles’ letter is progressive political thumping with accusations based on caricatures of evangelicals and pro-life supporters, throwing in President Trump for good measure. She implies that the people she believes are disenfranchised under the current political leadership have value. I affirm that every human life has great value.</p><p>It is the people of faith communities, wielding their Bibles as their marching orders, who have fought with the greatest fervor against war and violence, racism, economic injustice, immigrant rights and women’s rights, against slavery and sex trafficking, have stood beside women with problem pregnancies, spoken truth to power and have financially contributed toward the needs of the disenfranchised. I submit that fervent folks think at least as much and invest more of their time, talent and treasure to children living outside the womb than inside it.</p><p>Ms. Voiles has set up a false view of people of faith and pro-life supporters and then attempted to tear them down, and with them, their values.</p><p>Only since Roe v. Wade, women, without the justification of war or self-defense, can decide to kill an unborn child (or as it now seems, a newborn child) for whatever reason they choose. Babies are aborted because of their race, gender, anticipated handicap or inconvenience. While Ms. Voiles is obviously in favor of ‘gun control,’ which has not shown to lower homicide rates, one’s choice not to abort has a very high success record for the baby.</p><p><p><strong>Peter Jessen</strong></p><p><p><strong>Franklin</strong></p>
