According to Merriam Webster, to benefit “at the expense of” is to benefit as a result of someone or something being harmed. A Christian should easily understand that anything done “at the expense of” another violates the Lord’s instruction to “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you (Lk. 6:31). Simple enough, right? But many who are quick to recall this passage when they are the ones being harmed, become inconsistent in application when they stand to benefit greatly.
Consider the following scenario of benefiting “at the expense of” harm to another.
By God’s definition of life (conception, Psa. 139:13-16; Jer. 1:5), abortion does what God hates; sheds the blood of the innocent (Prov. 6:17). Abortion is therefore murder.
1. A woman decides to have her human baby murdered (abortion) = sin.
2. Does this woman approve of murder?
Does accountability stop here?
1. The Doctor agrees to commit murder of the human baby (abortion) for money.
2. Is the Doctor guilty of contributing to the sin of this mother?
3. Does the Doctor approve of murder?
Is this where the line of accountability stops?
1. The pharmaceutical company is desirous of receiving tissue from murdered babies for experimental purposes.
2. The pharmaceutical company makes an agreement with the Doctor to purchase human baby remains for scientific testing.
3. The pharmaceutical company did not commit the murder of the baby.
4. Is the pharmaceutical company guilty of contributing to the death of the human baby?
5. Does this pharmaceutical company approve of murder?
Is this where the line of accountability stops?
1. The scientists perform tests with the remains of the murdered human baby.
2. Are those scientists guilty of contributing to the sin of the mother?
3. Are those who knowingly experiment with the remains of the murdered baby guilty of contributing to the death of the child?
5. Do these scientists approve of murder?
Is this where the line of accountability stops?
1. Medicines containing remains of the murdered human baby are injected/ingested into other humans to prevent sickness/death.
2. Are those who knowingly accept a medicine, developed from the remains of a murdered human baby, guilty of contributing to the death of the human baby?
3. Do those who accept these medicines approve of murder?
Where does accountability end?
Some may ask, “But could not this process be fairly compared to the harvesting of organs from an accident/murder victim?” The United States' system for organ procurement operates under a model of expressed consent. This means that an individual will not be an organ donor unless he or she explicitly states otherwise (AMA Journal of Ethics). Organs are not taken from those who die unless they have given consent while living. Is harvesting from the murdered (aborted) babies an equal comparison? Definitely not! The organs from those babies are taken without their consent.
How much time must pass and how many people must be involved before the process of benefiting at the expense of harm to others is no longer tainted? If an innocent person is purposefully harmed in an act that is intended to bring benefit for the greater good of society it is not a moral act. It is Hedonism! It is SIN! And all who approve of it are accountable.
Comments