There is a reason the sun shines and dries things up. The rain falls and gets things wet. My immeasurable love for science is not a secret but I promise I'm not going into science right now. One thing I must say is that almost every scientist I know agree on the fact that nature cannot be altered without monumental consequences. When you breath, your oxygen should not be permanently replaced with carbon-dioxide and vice versa. It is natural for living creatures (Plants, Animals and Humans) to reproduce - Genesis 1:22; 1:28. Deliberate alteration of such natural process by putting an end to it cannot be successful without deadly consequences.
Everyone is busy arguing about when "LIFE" begins. A dead egg and a dead sperm CANNOT form a LIFE. If both are ALIVE when they came together as ONE, who cares about when the heart beat begins. Adam was a human when God formed him from the dust of the earth. There was NO HEARTBEAT until he received the breath of LIFE but Adam was still described as a man or human (Genesis 2:7). Those who do not believe in God will argue that the human is not "BREATHING" on it's own yet. If so, what do you think would happen if you went into a hospital and DESTROY a HUMAN that is hooked up to a breathing tube and "NOT" breathing on its own? People undergoing surgery are usually hooked up to a source of oxygen; do you want to get rid of them too? Should we now end the life of the old lady or guy walking down the street simply because they have oxygen tank to help with their breathing? Where do we draw the line folks? Or did we forget that no one can kill or destroy the SOUL of man? This is because only God has control over the soul of man that lives inside the "human" body. So killing or murder simply means you deny someone the opportunity to continue existence or function on this physical earth.
If you destroy a human, regardless of size or age, the choice to do so is solely on you. There is no need to start looking for ways to defend your choice, rather, PRAY for forgiveness and do everything humanly possible to abstain from such sin in the future. Grace is always available to us all but we must not take it for granted. Are we now going to start destroying all growing trees simply because they have NO fruits yet? How can they bear fruit if you don't give them a chance to get there? My point is, DON'T destroy a human before it gets a chance to show you a heartbeat and then justify it by saying there was no heart beat yet.
Nature cannot be successfully altered; not even by a constitution. We cannot claim to "know" God if we don't understand why we became Christians. This understanding means that we went into an agreement with God and accepted the bible as our Christian constitution. The bible teaches us morality, which is the difference between right and wrong. But the worldly constitution is all about legality, which tells us what is legal and illegal. Something being legally right doesn't mean it is morally right. I'm not saying to go ahead and start disobeying the government in whatever part of the world you live in but make sure to "compare" their legal constitution with your moral constitution before reaching a conclusion.
You don't steal, not because the Supreme Court said not to but because the bible said not to steal. If the courts or the government say that murder is a crime, this is good to know but this is not why you are not a murderer. You are not a murderer because you listen to God, not man. This ability to prioritize who to listen to will help us stay on the straight and narrow because we will understand our walk with God better. So if prostitution becomes legal or constitutional tomorrow, you will not need a debate as to if you should or should not obey the government because you have already pledge to one source of information and truth, which is your Christian constitution - the bible. Let me emphasize on something that the apostle Paul said prior to making a list of sins that will lead us to hell if we continue in them. Paul did not try to single out a group of people to condemn; instead he used a different approach by letting us know that sin is sin and as Christians, we don't need a court or a government to make this clear to us.
Paul, in first Corinthians 6 was upset that Christians were relying on unbelievers in a court of law (aka the government) to tell them the difference between right and wrong. He wasn't concerned about right or wrong that had to do with basic governmental rules and regulations. The right and wrong he was focused on was the moral or biblical truth about how we as Christians must live our lives here on earth regardless of what human rules are. No, Paul is not saying you can't go to court as a Christian. But you cannot rely on a court of law to tell you that stealing is wrong when you should already know this as a Christian. Long story short, Paul is basically saying we should know better (1 Corinthians 6:1-8) especially as those with access to the perfect law of liberty (James 1:25). The only law that should take priority in our lives is God's law.
Not everything that "looks wrong" to us human is a sin because not every human law is right. Daniel was thrown into the lion's den for not following the law of the land to worship another god so the word "law" doesn't automatically mean something that is or should be BINDING to us Christians.
See related post on same sex marriage:
