In this “Theology and Culture” (T&C) blog we are going to finish up a three-part series on the issue of abortion. I would encourage you to read the previous two written pieces found either at www.oakridgbc.org under our resource tab and the label “Theology and Culture” or at my website, www.scottreeve.org under the “blog” tab.
We are going to focus our attention on the “Abortion Abolitionist” (AA) movement and see some within the movement are coming from when it comes to dealing with abortion and those involved in it, whether they be doctors, parents of the child in the womb, etc.
The questions that we will tackle have to do with how we should handle some of the ideas that the AA movement is adamant about. Think about some of the following questions as we begin- Biblically, can Christians support incremental abortion (up to fifteen weeks, twenty weeks, or heartbeat bills)? Should those who provide abortions be held accountable judicially for their part in taking the lives of children, some even ignoring the laws currently on the books? And how should the mothers of these unborn children be approached and treated? Should they go to jail as well?
As we shall see as we continue, the idea of sending every person to jail involved in abortion is not what AA is saying. I would agree that this national travesty needs to end, and that includes incremental abortion laws. In our country, we have to do it legally. But the goal is not to Christianize America but to make every living being have the right to life, because all are made in the image of God (Gen. 1), including the children in the womb.
As I mentioned in a previous blog, I used to be excited and supportive of laws put in place to end abortion, even if they had a time stamp on them. If a baby made it to, let’s say, fifteen weeks, and the state they were living in outlawed abortion after that, I considered it a “win.”
I have begun to change my thinking on this. The reason: if life begins at conception, any law that puts a timeframe on having an abortion is still killing a child. Our first of these three blogs showed that Biblically, life begins at conception, and we looked at how many in the scientific community, which includes many who are not Christ-followers, believe that life begins at conception.
So before diving into the AA movement noted at the beginning of the blog, let me share where I stand on abortion. I oppose abortion at any time of the pregnancy. I realize that most states in our country allow the taking of the child’s life up to a certain point, usually not past twenty weeks, but the staggering facts are, most children are aborted before that time period. Over 90% and some statistics say 98% of babies are killed within the first fifteen weeks of a pregnancy. Having incremental laws where children can be killed up to a certain point is saving some babies, yes, but still abortion is taking the lives of thousands of children.
There is no way to sugarcoat it. I, as a Christian, cannot support anything but the total, legal, overturning of any pro-life law that still allows for the taking of a human life. This is where I would agree with the AA movement. I am for the total abolishment of abortion, from conception to birth. I also know I am in the minority on this view but Biblically, I feel that this is the side I must land on.
Having said that, I now want to move on to some other difficult questions and thoughts when it comes to this issue. Those include, for example, a couple of questions: Should mothers who abort their babies face prosecution if indeed abortion is the taking of a life and they are aware of what they are doing? In addition, should abortion providers face criminal charges for their part in the killing of the unborn?
As we mentioned in a previous blog, there is some difference of opinion within the AA movement on where to draw the line on these issues. Every pro-life group that I am aware of opposes any legal action being taken against the mother of the child. When I say pro-life I am talking about those who support ending abortions up to a certain point and want to save children’s lives. But they believe legal action against, specifically moms who have abortions, is going to far.
Some states have banned abortion (e.g., Arkansas, Missouri) but those laws are being challenged so there may be a turning over of what is currently on the books. The ballot measures in several states that deal with laws regarding abortion are “citizen initiated,” though in some cases it is the legislature of some states taking action. The word “viability” comes up often when discussing when a child is considered a child. But what make a child “viable?” Who determines whether the unborn is a person or not? A newborn cannot survive on its own. Are they “viable?” This is so subjective.
Back to the discussion at hand. Should there be legal action taken against women who have abortions and, as noted above, others who are involved in the taking of the life of the baby? This thinking is based on equal protection under the laws for all, including the unborn. One AA site states the following,
“If abortion is murder, and we all know it is, it ought to be criminalized as such. Abolitionists believe that abortion must be totally abolished through a law which makes preborn children equal under law. Equal protection for preborn children would mean that preborn children would be afforded all the same legal protections that all of us enjoy. It would mean that nobody -- not father, mother, doctor, or anyone else -- is permitted to participate in the murder of a child in the womb. It would mean the available penalties for murdering any other person would be available for anyone found guilty of knowingly murdering a preborn human being.
Equal protection would not mean that every mother or father who murders their child would receive murder charges. There are all sorts mitigating and exculpating factors that might lessen or eliminate the penalty for an aborting parent in a given situation. Some women are victims who are coerced into having abortions, and will not face any charges. Some will deserve second- or third-degree murder charges based on the circumstances. Some will receive immunity by testifying against the abortionist or pill trafficker (the big fish, so to speak). Each person charged with murder by abortion would receive all the same due process and opportunities for appeal that all defendants receive. This is the abolitionist position.” - Abolitionist Rising website
The question we must ask is whether the AA movement is going too far in this. Do we cringe at what we just read? If, though, abortion is murder which many Christians believe, should there not be some accountability for those involved in the killing of the unborn? We may claim that we are not showing mercy and grace to the participants yet we call for justice when other crimes are committed. My goal is to get us thinking through things. People will come to different conclusions on what to think about the quote above.
I have watched one video of a woman saying that she saw that baby ripped out of her and she would do it again. Such callousness shows that they this type of thinking needs to be challenged, even if it means legal action. Life begins at conception and thus any point of killing the child is sin and murder. Though part of the Old Testament law, a reading of Exodus 21:22-25 tells us that there is justice for the unborn. Instead of writing that text off as for Israel only, the principles apply today.
Obviously, the answer to all of this killing of children is the Gospel. People who have a relationship with Christ grow to understand how God views all those made in His image. Keep sharing Christ.
Commenti