39 years. 54 million…
“Pro-life” and “Pro-choice” both seem to have such a negative connotation. I immediately think of extremists. Why do I think of that? Because when ever pro-lifers are shown on television, they only show the strange, extreme, and often illegal protestors of abortion. I have a negative vibe with pro-choice people, because I completely disagree with them. This has left me and many others in my generation sitting on the sidelines doing…nothing. Saying…nothing.
‘There is nothing we can do.’
‘I don’t want to be associated with those people.’
‘We can’t change the laws.’
Thoughts like these resonate within our minds. I see pastors and leaders around me (that believe abortion is wrong), doing nothing on the topic. It is almost like it is a ‘late 80s/early 90s’ topic. We don’t see it fitting in our glossy sermon series. We don’t want to be controversial. We don’t know how to talk about it in a practical way. We might not even care.
Over the last 39 years, over 54 million people have lost their lives to abortion. These individuals were not respected with a choice of life or death. We made it for them. We can be passionate about poverty, slavery, and injustice all over the world because it is religiously cool to do so in modern Christian circles while 1.3 million kids will die in the USA this calendar year.
President Barak Obama issued an official statement supporting abortion this week.
“As we mark the 39th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, we must remember that this Supreme Court decision not only protects a woman’s health and reproductive freedom, but also affirms a broader principle: that government should not intrude on private family matters. I remain committed to protecting a woman’s right to choose and this fundamental constitutional right.”
Let’s stop for a second and make sure we understand what he is saying.
He is saying that the decision to legalize abortions protects women’s health. How? It is completely ignorant to say that allowing abortions has saved women’s lives. Look at the birth/pregnancy related illness and death before and after the legal decision. He fails to mention that abortions can be extremely dangerous to the mother’s body. As to reproductive freedom, this is also erroneous. If you are ending your pregnancy you are NOT reproducing. The facts are that abortions can limit your ability to become pregnant in the future, therefore restricting your reproductive freedom.
However, the deeper philosophical and moral question is: “Why is a woman’s right to choose a higher priority than the child’s right to life?” The government should not interfere with a family’s decision unless the family’s decision is to eliminate one of their own family members (and that family member has no voice in the decision-making process). The government does not seem to have a problem making laws against murder, stealing, or perjury when it involves families. His premise is like saying, “Well, we can’t have a law on the books about killing your mother, because that is a family matter and the government can’t get involved in private family matters.”
He goes on to say:
“While this is a sensitive and often divisive issue — no matter what our views, we must stay united in our determination to prevent unintended pregnancies, support pregnant woman and mothers, reduce the need for abortion, encourage healthy relationships, and promote adoption. And as we remember this historic anniversary, we must also continue our efforts to ensure that our daughters have the same rights, freedoms, and opportunities as our sons to fulfill their dreams.”
I completely support some of his thoughts here: we need to support pregnant women and mothers, reduce the need for abortion, encourage healthy relationships, and promote adoptions. YES!
I have some serious problems with the other parts of this statement. The problem isn’t necessarily what he says, but what he implies. It seems as though he wants to use ‘any means necessary’ to prevent unintended pregnancies. This point of view says that the baby is the worst thing that can happen. When discussing this issue, one must not reduce the language to ‘a pregnancy’ or ‘fetus’ or ’tissue’. When using that vocabulary it dehumanizes and only describes a certain time frame in the life of that PERSON. It is a person that is in the womb and a part of the discussion. It is though President Obama is saying we must use whatever means necessary to eliminate this unborn person from life, from the future of our country.
He ends by bringing up the issue of broken homes. Men leave. Women are left to raise children alone. This is a huge social problem in America. Instead of dealing with the men or the women, his solution is to eliminate the life of the child. As with the previous issue, when we use terms such as ‘pregnancy’ instead of ‘person’, it is much easier to swallow the reality of loss of life.
A Huffington Post article quotes Cecile Richards, Planned Parenthood’s president, “Obama’s pro-choice and pro-contraception decision on Friday will likely be a major reason for women to rally around him in November.” Right, but it is interesting that the only women supporting him in November are the ones that were born. There will be an eiry silence from around 24 million women that were never born.
As President Reagan once stated, “With regard to the freedom of the individual for choice with regard to abortion, there’s one individual who’s not being considered at all. That’s the one who is being aborted. And I’ve noticed that everybody that is for abortion has already been born.”
Posted on January 23, 2012, in Daily Word, politics, President Obama, theology and tagged abortion, birth control, church, pastor robin, planned parenthood, president obama, roe vs wade. Bookmark the permalink. 9 Comments.
Hello, Pastor Robin,
I agree with your extremist view. We have discussed a bit of this in Monday evenings. When people choose “sides”, what they don’t realize is that most issues, whether public or personal almost, always go from one extreme to the next. When I was growing up, before I received Christ Jesus, I did not believe in abortion but it was because of the hurt it adds to an already broken heart. Many women are broken hearted before they even decide, abortion only adds to that grief. Many women go through a deep depression after an abortion. This was my issue with Prolife, because in my day, they had those horrible pictures of baby body parts, parading the streets, yelling and hurting people. These are “Christians”? , I always thought.
Well, if I were going to be a Christian I would have to be an outcast because I was not about to be a part of that. I so appreciated when you said that as Christians, If we want to help and be available when people are in trouble, we need to show more love and compassion instead of judgment and hatred. Well, ,maybe you didn’t say it like that, but that is how I took it.
Thank you for Sunday, it was “REAL TALK” for “REAL PEOPLE”.
It is interesting how people never say they are pro abortion in fact they make it clear to say they are pro choice. They want to distant themselves from saying they support abortion. Why? If it is not wrong and it is the liberating option, then why not say you are pro abortion?
I have been watching service online and have been extremely blessed. My daughter, future son-in-law & grandson attend Promiseland & talk about the blessings daily. I love the “straight talk” regarding the WORD. I have been a Christian for 20 years and I am grateful everyday that Jesus died for me and that I serve a Father who will never leave me or forsake me like my biological parents did. God’s precious Holy Spirit comforts me and reveals all truth to us all. On Sunday when you talked about showing compassion to young unwed mothers I was brought to tears because one day I was one of those girls. I was blessed to be in love & eventually married to my daughter’s father and we have now been together for 29 years & happily in wedded bliss for 26 years but boy do I remember “the church folk’s” negative reaction & lack of compassion. Thank you for leading the flock as you are lead by HIM.
With love & prayer,
Helen Roberson (Candace Roberson’s mom & Myron Barnes’ (bass player’s soon-to-be son-in-law)
Thanks for your comments, Ms Roberson! We love those kids of yours. 🙂
Great words sir, great words.
The term “pro-life” for those who are opposed to legal abortion is further objected to by activists who support the legalization of abortion because women’s lives are lost due to unsafe abortions when abortion is illegal. The use of that term is also considered ironic since many “pro-life” activists oppose the use of abortion procedures even when they are deemed medically necessary to save the life of the pregnant woman, or to resolve a situation that endangers both the life of the woman and the fetus to such an extent that both will die if an abortion is not performed.
Sugel, Thanks for the comment.
To say that pro-lifers are against life because they don’t want to save a woman’s life who is intentionally ending another life is a fallacy. Pro-lifers disagree with the original concept of abortion whether legal or illegal. Your argument is like saying “murdering your brother will put your life at risk, so we must legalize it and eliminate that danger”.
The issue we are discussing is the decision to end a life when there are no medical complications. If there are 2 people in danger of losing life because of a medical complication, then that is a different discussion. That decision is based on circumstances outside the mother and father’s control.
Pingback: My Homepage