This Could Be Hambo’s Worst Post Ever

Once again, the lack of actual news generated by creationists requires that we drift into the so-called “social issues.” That’s what we find in the latest blog post by Ken Ham (ol’ Hambo) — the ayatollah of Appalachia, the world’s holiest man who knows more about religion and science than everyone else. The thing is titled Abortion — Is the Bible Ambiguous? Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us for emphasis, and occasional Curmudgeonly interjections that look [like this]:

Abortion is the killing of an unborn child in his or her mother’s womb. There’s really no other honest way of describing it. Actually, there is another word for it — murder.[Gasp!] So-called “pro-choice” activists (really, “pro-murder” activists) use terms like “reproductive freedom,” “health care,” or “a woman’s right to choose” to try and make abortion sound like anything but what it is — the intentional murder of an unborn child.

This isn’t a big issue for your Curmudgeon, but we gave our own opinion on the subject five years ago — in Egnor Rants About Abortion. If anyone cares, it’s there. Let’s get back to Hambo’s post:

According to the “American Worldview Inventory 2020” survey from Arizona Christian University, “44% of self-identified Christians said they think the Bible is ‘ambiguous in its teaching about abortion.’” And 34% said, “abortion is morally acceptable if it spares the mother from financial or emotional discomfort or hardship.”

Hambo is horrified. He says:

It is a massive failure on the part of parents and the church that nearly half of professing Christians believe the Bible is wishy-washy or unclear on the sanctity of every human life, including the unborn. Scripture is not ambiguous — it is abundantly clear (see below). People just either don’t know their Bibles, have never been taught to use the Bible as their starting point, or are suppressing the truth that is abundant from God’s Word and science to go along with the culture of death and its message that women can only be free if they’re legally permitted to murder their own children. Really, abortion is nothing but child sacrifice under another name.

You’re probably getting the impression that Hambo feels quite strongly about this subject. Actually, he feels strongly about every subject. He tells us:

Now, in the paragraphs that follow, I point to biblical passages that clearly demonstrate how God views the lives of the unborn — as fully human, made in the image of God (Genesis 1:27). And, it follows, if the unborn are fully human, the prohibitions regarding murdering them fully apply!

But first he devotes several boring paragraphs to disposing of other arguments that are sometimes offered in favor of abortion. We’ll skip that and get to his scriptural arguments — which are also boring. Here it comes:

Humans alone are made in the image of God (Genesis 1:27). We are not animals. [Oook, Oook!]

We are image bearers of the Creator, and every single human life has value and dignity because we are made in God’s image. We are fearfully and wonderfully knit together by God (Psalm 139:13) and known by him before we are even conceived (Jeremiah 1:5).

Convinced? Not yet? Okay, he continues:

And God’s Word is clear on murder:

Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed, for God made man in his own image. (Genesis 9:6)

[…]

You shall not murder. (Exodus 20:13)

Overwhelming, isn’t it? Let’s read on: Uh, no — let’s not. Hambo goes on and on for a couple of pages, and this post might be the most ghastly thing we’ve ever seen at his website. That’s saying a lot! But if the subject interests you, don’t let our opinion hold you back. Click over there and suck it all in. Than get back here and tell us what we’re missing.

Copyright © 2020. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

. AddThis Social Bookmark Button . Permalink for this article

17 responses to “This Could Be Hambo’s Worst Post Ever

  1. Actually, the Bible verse citedsays the *very opposite* of what he claims. ” [Search domain http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus+21:22-25&version=KJV%5D https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus+21:22-25&version=KJV
    If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman’s husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life, Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, Burning for burning, wound for wound …”

    So abortion (which merits punishmenttobe decided case by case) is *different from* causing the death of the mother, which meritsthe death penalty.

    I’m shocked. I thought we could at least trust Ham to report scripture correctly [sarcasm emoticon]

  2. Michael Fugate

    If God cared about the unborn, why didn’t God save them from the Flood?

    Protestants only opposed abortion when women gained control of their own bodies – as long as men controlled when, how, where, why and with whom women had sex and controlled any resulting pregnancies they were in favor of abortion. Get rid of unwanted heirs from the multitude of mistresses.

    It is why they hate the 60s; women an BIPOC were empowered. Something they can’t abide.

  3. chris schilling

    @MichaeF
    “If God cared about the unborn…”

    Why doesn’t God prevent abortion, period? Why does He rely on Bible-interpreting evangelicals to do His bidding? This is a guy who creates the universe, but apparently can’t be arsed to save unwanted fetuses?
    Why do ‘vangies attribute so much power to a deity seemingly unwilling to manifest it?

    Why, why, why…?

  4. Theodore J Lawry

    “Hambo’s worst post ever?” SC, don’t tease us like that! I agree it was bad, but considering Ham’s track record, “worst” is a pretty high bar!

  5. Hambo, Hambo, where you been? Round the world and I’m goin again. Whatcha gonna do when you get back? Gonna take a walk by the railroad track.
    A song of Bums dislocated by the Great Depression of the 1930’s.

  6. Creationist/fundie view on life: it’s sacred before birth, not so much just after and it becomes less sacred the older a person gets.
    It’s a long time ago, but Ol’Hambo advocates death penalty.
    TomS also reminds me that Ol’Hambo’s god indeed is the worst abortion offender ever. It’s called miscarriage.
    Fundie morals are subjective – if YHWH kills people (aka murder) it’s good. If humans do it it’s evil. But rather will Nigel Farage become a Remainer than a fundie admit this.
    Most fundies oppose sex ed (compare Norway) and easily accessible contraceptives, which are effective regarding lowering abortion rates.
    Fundies are hypocrites to their core – especially when they deny it, because they describe themselves as sinners.

    So I tend to agree with our dear SC. Given that about 50% of the population consists of women Ol’Hambo’s views on abortion are worse than his on biology.

  7. If fundamentalists like Hambo really believed that fetuses were sentient human beings, they would demand that billions be spent on research to stop the hundreds of millions of miscarriages that occur every year. And yet, that area of potential research gets exceptionally little interest.

  8. Does not matter what the hambone says or does or if abortion is illegal, the LIARs4Money preachers will always be given enough money to get abortions for their mistresses. Abortion laws are ONLY against the poor.

  9. Dave Luckett

    Paul D: It’s not that they believe that fetuses are sentient human beings; it’s that they believe they have souls. This is somewhat at odds with what the Bible implies about souls.

    The Genesis stories preserve an early belief that animae, spirits, souls – the concept appears to be synonymous – were associated with breathing. The “Spirit of God” that moved on the face of the deep seems to be an invocation of the wind. Adam might have been formed from clay, but he did not become “a living creature” until God breathed the “breath of life” into his nostrils. This “breath”, nephesh chayya, was also given to animals, even insects, (apparently the ancient storytellers had noticed that insects can drown) but not plants.

    So, for consistency, one would suppose that the Bible-believers would hold that a fetus was not human, and did not acquire a soul, until it drew its first breath. But as has been many times observed in these pages, consistency was never their strong suit.

  10. Michael Fugate

    If abortion is murder, then every miscarriage has to be investigated as a potential crime. Women have been imprisoned on top of the trauma of losing a pregnancy. Will the state monitor women with monthly urine tests? I can see the right paying for this while not paying for health care for women or children. Law and order.

  11. Charley Horse X

    The imported Ham uses the abortion controversy the same way Retaliban pols do. It is used to gain wealth and power. The lowest of the low hanging fruit on the voter and religion trees are the target of both. The soon to be new Supreme Court justice will do all she can to reverse Roe vs Wade. You can take that to the bank. Abortion rights does play second fiddle to white supremacy in attracting Retaliban voters. Of course, many of those white supremacists want to reverse Roe vs Wade, too. The fundies haven’t given up on getting back into public schools. A social conservative court can easily be predicted to support all of fundies’ goals. Such as allowing tax dollars to be used to pay tuitions for sKools run by religions.

  12. Every death is caused by God. One could say that human death is defined by the departing of the soul from the body, a supernatural event. Yet God is not guilty of murder. I will leave the explanation to the Creationists.
    Whatever the explanation, I do not see how that applies also to the taking of one’s property, or infinite punishment for finite sin, etc. in particular, how there is no reason to apply that kind of explanation to letting us believe things which do not correspond with reality. That is, spiritualism does not provide a basis for the Correspondance Theory of Truth. (See the Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism for the details.)

  13. Michael Fugate

    If abortion were forbidden, wouldn’t male masturbation have been punishable by death? People believed humans were preformed in semen and women were only vessels for the male seed. Masturbation was never prohibited in the Bible.

  14. @Michael Fugate And, as I’m sure you know about perhaps some others don’t, Onan’s sin was not masturbation (or rather coitus interruptus), but failing in his duty to impregnate his brother’s widow

  15. Retired Prof

    FrankB reminds us: “Creationist/fundie view on life: it’s sacred before birth, not so much just after and it becomes less sacred the older a person gets.
    It’s a long time ago, but Ol’Hambo advocates death penalty.”

    Yes, and the death penalty is not the only inconsistency. The pro-life bunch is also the faction that opposes free school lunch programs, public housing projects, Medicaid, safety regulations on businesses, the recent government-mandated measures to prevent the spread of Coronavirus particles, and other measures to preserve and protect the post-born. They support foreign wars, and domestically, most of the would-be executioners that strut around carrying AR-15’s and other death-dealing weaponry are aligned with anti-abortionists.

    In fact, opposition to abortion is the only feature I can think of that does not fit the epithet “death cult” for Hambone’s type of believer.

    And, to make sure I stay on the topic of evolution/creationism: Many, perhaps most, miscarriages involve a fetal or maternal problem with the pregnancy. The capacity of the uterus to terminate a pregnancy that would be a drain on the mother while failing to pass on her genes to grandchildren would present a selective advantage.

    Or to put it in Creationist terms, God in his mercy took to his bosom a potential life for the sake of the rest of the family.

  16. @Retired Prof
    Every explanation of a death works as well as a explanation for a falsehood.
    This means that one can construct a parallel argument to the Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism:
    Spiritualism provides no basis for truth.