I think it's time for me to leave. Thank y'all for letting me observe your interaction, something of your goals and ideals, but I think you and I are not the match that I'd hoped we might be. I am with you on most everything, except where you seem to have an abstract vision of "the unborn." Please don't think that I am an advocate of "the right to choose." I believe modern notions of freedom of will are a denial of the freedom in Christ to which Paul so well points. Further, I do think that a fertilized egg in a woman's belly is nothing trivial. I do think that an implanted embryo is among the clearest of promises of the coming of God's Reign. I do think that a fetal heartbeat is a sign of the breath that God breathed into the Adam dust sculpture in the Garden. However, I also think that the new life that is in early stages or late stages of human disclosure has in itself anything but sanctity. It instantiates sanctity only as it is gifted with it, as the mutilated body of Jesus is gifted with glory on Easter Sunday. At this time when churches are about to be told by the American Supreme Court that it is the state that is to determine (with Adam and Eve at the foot of the Tree) what is good and what is evil for their daughters and the lives that are emerging in their wombs—even if by horrific violence—I fear that a judgment that all life has sanctity does not, in its abstraction, point the way forward. Had you spoken at this point with more concreteness, closer to the ground, with compassion and solidarity with those whom pregnancy is still a question to be addressed through prayer, I may have been in a position to linger with y'all. I am but a poor Wesleyan looking for a politics of the lowly Nazarene, a politics of the gospel, a politics that does not yield so quickly to calculation, but waits, abides, remains, with the children and women who by no wish of their own have found themselves impregnated.