Man – The Image of God

Filed on 12 April 2004 in Speeches category. Print This Page

Man – the Image of God We are bombarded by inconsistencies and contradictions about our behaviour and conscience.

Recent examples have been the furore about the exposure of Janet Jackson’s breast and the David Beckham affair with alleged sexual romps. Do we only frown on these people because they are ‘famous’? Do we really disapprove of their behaviour or do we just pretend to? Or do we only disapprove if they get caught?

Even if there is only a little disapproval, how do we reconcile that with the apparently insatiable desire for the seductively clothed or unclothed female form, and the inducement to casual sex espoused on the reality TV shows like Temptation Island or The Bachelor.

Consider the inconsistencies with abortion, animal protection and ‘informed consent’.

Change, if it comes, will happen because liberals have finally grasped the difficulty at the heart of the pro-choice position: that is, the impossibility of reconciling an enlightened opposition to animal experiments and unnecessarily invasive medical procedures with a disregard for the rights of the foetus and a willingness to subject women to a gruesome operation. (The Daily Telegraph Britain as quoted in The West Australian April 6, 2004.)

As Kim Beazley (Senior) observed (News Weekly, 4 May 2002), supporters of abortion usually dodge the fact that we are killing the young and pretending somehow that this is not taking life. (Quoted in The Twilight of the Elites by David Flint p121.)

We do have a conscience that helps us to know the distinction between right and wrong. We do have a soul. We may dishonour our inbuilt moral standards but we do know they are there however much we may try to ignore them – we are more, and should be more, than animals. The human being is created in the Image of God.

Another illustration of this is contained in David Flint’s book (p122) talking about ‘foetal reduction’ in cases of multiple pregnancy. The Herald Sunconducted a poll with the question: “Should abortions of unwanted twins be allowed?” The result, published on 29 November 2001 was 1429 No (95.6%) and 66 Yes (4.4%). Even if this astonishing result only reflects the agony that people think may be felt by the surviving child, doesn’t this say something about their perception of that child’s view as to whether its twin was actually a human person and therefore how the adult also reallyperceives the aborted twin?

With respect to “responsibility free” sex, natural law determines that we reap what we sow. Remarkably, this is reflected in the agonies that the soap opera characters go through, yet it is still overwhelmed by the enticement to sexual freedom.

We must take the risk of being distinctive and tell the truth. We do have a soul. Natural law is imprinted in our hearts. We may be ridiculed, opposed and marginalised but there will be a part inside most people that will resonate with this truth and we must keep on telling it.

Lachlan Dunjey 12.4.04

Share |