Contribution 3: Abortion and the Second Stage of Democracy
This series of posts began on 11/08/24 with the question, “Can we save our democracy?”, followed by “If your life or the life of someone you love depended on loving someone you hate, could you love them?” The premise has been that our social conscience (suneidesis)1 must take the next step if democracy is to survive, that of loving enemies of our conscience, with or without religion.
With roots in the Judeo-Christian ethos, we see loving our neighbor as ourselves as the pinnacle, but perhaps we have not fully understood what Christ really meant when he raised it to loving our neighbor even when they are enemies. We have developed our democracy without loving our enemies but cannot take it any further without it.
Foremost concerning Christ
Since the beginning of our democracy, most Americans have emphasized faith in God and rest on the great love we believe that He has for each of us. Meeting us where we are, Christ says that we can be mature in our love like God only if we love our enemies. Now love makes us want to be like the one we love, so since we love God, we should want to take that next step. But it requires truth not faith, for Christ said that even if we do not believe in him, do not have faith in him, we should believe in his works, loving our enemies the truth behind all of them. This is foremost.
The first stage of our democracy has depended on practicing the basics of faith without the maturity Christ spoke of, the reason for our successes and failures, respectively. In the second stage, regardless of our beliefs, enough of us need to reach this kind of maturity for our democracy to survive. May this post help us reach an understanding of this together, for it is about how we all start this journey on earth the same way and how that relates to the divisive issue of abortion. May it help us get there together whether we see this discussion as symbolic or not.
Our Beginning in this World
Knowledge of Word tells us that Word’s life (in God or Life) is the light of everyone, that is, we are living names of light in Word, and that Word’s light (in God or Life) illuminates everyone coming into this world, that is, Word illuminates us with the seed of conscientious awareness of this world when manifesting with us in our physical body at birth. The precise moment this happens is when we first breathe the breath of the spirit (or energy) of life, which works according to the law of the spirit of life in Word.
The body without the spirit (in the life of Word) is dead. Removal of a fetus from the womb before it is able to receive the breath of the spirit of life will prevent a successful birth. Does this mean that the life of Word was not in the fetus and the mother alone was sustaining the heartbeat, or that Word was in it sustaining the heartbeat but the early removal caused the death of the person that Word illuminated in the womb?
Compare this to someone in a coma. According to this reasoning, if the life of Word (or the energy of Life, not biological life) has already de-manifested and life support is removed, the body will die, showing that the heartbeat was not sustained by the breath of the spirit of life and that the biological life that can be sustained by life support falls short of something greater. Likewise, an unborn baby’s heartbeat is not evidence of that greater something.
Knowledge of Word puts it this way: If a pregnant woman enters a fight between her husband and another man and she is struck by the man and loses her baby, the man will pay a fine, but if further harm occurs, he will pay life for a life, eye for an eye, and so forth. Paying only a fine indicates that the fetus is not considered a life. Further harm refers to the baby being born and then dying or sustaining some harm. Only then can it be considered a life and life for a life or eye for an eye can be applied.
The value of the human body is great, before and after birth, however, according to Word, it is not murder if it is aborted before birth. At the core of this discussion is who we believe we are, who we are to love. If we believe that we are the fetus itself, physical beings only, loving an enemy of conscience is more difficult, for then we must love every physical action as them. We are not to love a murderer, for under this belief, we would have to love the act of murder. Of course, we can still see them as blind and love them for who they are as physical beings when they are not blind. But if we believe that we are only embodied physically and are something more, how do we understand our beginning in the womb?
Consider the account of John leaping for joy within his mother’s womb when Jesus was nearby in his mother’s womb. Now, it literally states that in his mother’s womb, Jesus was born from the Holy Spirit, not conceived as most translations mistranslate it, due to knowledge only gradually being revealed to us and not a lack of faith.
Word said that that which is born of the spirit is spirit. The name Jesus, at least in this passage, refers not to the fetus but to Jesus himself, born of the spirit, the living name of light who says, before Abraham was (who lived 2,000 years earlier), I am. He is the now of our whole bodily light in Name’s world conscience, full of light. Jesus did not grow up into this reality. The reality already existed and was birthed in the light of his mother’s living name.
Also embodied by the fetus in his mother’s womb, Jesus was then physically birthed and, as such, was called Immanuel. About seven hundred years before this, knowledge of Word stated that a child, referring to Christ, will be born called Immanuel – who will have to grow up and learn knowledge before being able to choose good over evil (blindness) and yet not resist it.
Both realities can coexist, just as our conscience has no past or future while we have memory and can contemplate the future. The question is when do we become aware of the bridge that joins them? When we grow in knowledge to understand and practice the principle that Word teaches.
Also called the Word of life, Jesus did not need his own breath of the spirit of life to be alive in the womb but needed it at birth to begin his journey of knowledge. He himself was alive in the womb and lacked no knowledge, while at the same time, his fetus had a heartbeat because of his mother but was not alive until receiving its first breath from his own spirit of life. Although his birth was unique, knowledge of Word states that his body was no different than ours.
As for John, it states that he was filled with the Holy Spirit from his mother’s womb. Although not birthed in the light of his mother’s living name like Jesus was in his mother’s, John was at least embodied by his fetus in her in order for it to leap when he became aware of Jesus embodied so near.
However, like Jesus, John’s fetus had a heartbeat because of his mother but was not alive until it took its first breath of Word’s spirit of life, at which time he began his journey of knowledge. Note that John is the only person recorded in the Bible to have taken birth twice. Jesus said that for those who can receive it, John was Elijah, who lived some eight hundred years earlier. Whatever his spiritual name is, he was not two physical beings. Word said that that which is born of the flesh is flesh and that the flesh profits nothing (in our whole body full of light).
Again, with our physical instruments, we can measure our miniscule planet against the enormity of our galaxy, as well as measure the presence of a heartbeat. But only as conscientious life can we understand conscientious life. We can understand this to be true about Jesus and John or simply ponder it – both possible only because we are conscientious life.
Knowledge of Word reveals that the rest of us do not experience what they did in the womb, as the movement of a heartbeat or leaping alone is not evidence of it. None of us are the Word of life or are filled with the Holy Spirit from our mother’s womb. Jeremiah may have been an exception. For God said that before He formed him in the womb, He knew him, implying that he existed before the womb, a reference to him as a living name of light in Word – whom God seemingly embodied in the womb before birth.
Formed in the womb, however, was the common way of explaining our beginning when we were known as living souls, formed from the dust of the ground. But now we are to be known as life-giving spirit in Word, invited to learn the truth and participate in this reality. When we enter this world though and take our first breath through the fetus prepared for us, we lack knowledge and must accept the surface appearance of gender and race, telling us that we are physical beings, living souls made from dust.
Word explained, therefore, that to see the kingdom of God, we must be born again. To see that we are names of light in the life-giving spirit of Word, formed in the singularity of Name’s whole body of light in the world conscience, full of light, we must be transformed by the renewing of our mind. Knowledge of the principle renews our mind and thus our democracy, to know how we come into this world, who we are, and how to love Name through each other in the now of Word.
Legalizing Abortion
Although not murder, abortion is still considered wrong under the knowledge of Word, however, we should consider the role addictions play in this. A major consideration in having children is financial and addiction can work against our ability to maintain financial stability. Simply put, when we are poor and know that life begins with the breath of the spirit of life, abortion is a reasonable solution. It is still not right, but when we are trapped in lifestyles encumbered by addiction, knowing full well that we cannot afford to have children, abortion becomes justifiable.
No matter the type, addiction always weakens our reasoning and resolve to deal with problems. Presently, the addictions that lead to most abortions are so widespread that it should be legalized again – with the understanding that it is still wrong just not murder, justifiable until contributing addictions are socially done away with.
If we understand this together, whether we see it as based on symbolism or not, we are taking the journey of knowledge together. The second stage of our democracy, working from crucial knowledge for this journey, requires that we restore collective awareness of our national singularity in the world conscience. We do this by using the visual pattern of agapé (love) to give Name all our agapé through those who are part of our singularity but blind to it in Word’s now.
Contribution 4: Information in the Democracy of our World Conscience
Suneidesis is pronounced soon-eye-day-sis. After reading the link explaining it, you will see how central it is to this teaching. Using this foreign word regularly in discussions helps us get accustomed to experiencing something new and positive in our awareness. When the word conscience is used, it will refer to the aspect of suneidesis that involves right and wrong, but this aspect cannot be separated from our co-conscientious awareness.