My kids are fascinated with speed and speed limits. They are always asking me, “Daddy, how fast are you going? How fast are you allowed to go?” One day they asked me why we make cars that can go much faster than the law allows. There were several answers I could have given them, but I chose the one they would most likely understand. There may be times of emergency when we need to drive faster than the law allows. If my wife is giving birth in the backseat of our car, I’m not going to be looking down at my speedometer. I don’t expect a police officer to be writing me a ticket while I’m bleeding out on the side of the road on the way to the emergency room. The exceptions define the rule. These exceptions show that the purpose of the rule is to protect life.
But what if the speeding laws were written to say that drivers must follow the posted speed limits except in cases where they are late for work or have a screaming child in the back seat? Now, what do the exceptions tell us about the laws? They tell us that the laws were written to encourage efficient travel, or to accommodate personal schedules, or some other arbitrary purpose. But they were not written to help preserve life on the road.
Have you noticed a shift in strategy by supporters of abortion? Have you detected the establishment of a new philosophical foundation for killing our own children? I think I have.
In the beginning, it was a matter of privacy. Abortion was a simple surgery, on par with a vasectomy, and no one should be listening in on conversations with a woman and her doctor. Abortion was a simple medical procedure that removed a clump of unfeeling, undifferentiated cells from a woman’s body. Of course, this argument became increasingly difficult to maintain, as ultrasounds of babies in utero became more widespread.
In the not too recent past, abortion was called a difficult decision that should be left to a woman and her doctor. That word “difficult” put some moral weight into the conversation. I mean, it is never a “difficult decision” to have a skin tag, or a pre-cancerous mole removed. It is just tissue, and healthy tissue will replace it. Undoubtedly the difficulty of abortion requires that you acknowledge at least the potentiality of this baby having a life of its own.
The argument moved a bit further down the philosophical track by declaring that abortion should be “safe, legal and rare.” Why rare? The evidence is piling up that a very young fetus can feel pain, that they are unique human beings and are entirely distinct from their mothers even while they are dependent upon them. Abortion should only occur in extreme situations goes the argument. But what qualifies as extreme should again be left to the mother and her doctor.
Well, people became increasingly uncomfortable with abortion for just any reason and at any point in the development of a child, so restrictions began to increase in state legislatures. Can the baby survive outside the womb? You may not kill the child. Can the baby feel pain in the womb? You may not kill her then either. Are you killing the child for a genetic defect, say being conceived a girl? We won’t allow you to kill her for that reason.
Positive care was required. You have to provide medical care to a baby born alive during an abortion. You have to keep medical records on the woman coming in for an abortion. You have to have admitting privileges at a local hospital so that if you rip a hole in the mother’s uterus as you are cutting up her child, you can transfer the mother with her medical records describing what transpired. These restrictions did not sit well with abortion advocates.
In 2015 we learned that Planned Parenthood had negotiated prices for fetal eye tissue (and brain matter, and spinal cords, and feet, toes and tiny fingers) and the outrage became so great there was an actual movement to take away federal tax dollars from them (damn radicals!).
This was a bridge too far, and proponents of abortion set their argument for abortion on a new moral foundation. Abortion is good, and it is good in and of itself. The killing of your child is a thing to be celebrated. You should SHOUT YOUR ABORTION. Let the world know what a good thing it is to kill your baby. Better for him, better for the mother, better for society. Abortion is no longer a necessary evil – it has become a moral imperative.
Today we write hymns about our abortions. We set up virtual shrines with ultrasound images of our babies so we can speak to them about how grateful we are to have the right to kill them. We demand that fetus joins us in our worship of self.
Ladies and gentlemen, I give you the fetal lullaby:
Alan Stout is the Associate Pastor of Providence Church in Pensacola, FL and active pro-life advocate in the Pensacola community. He serves on the board of Emerald Coast Coalition for Life.
Naomi is a mother and photographer in Martinsburg, West Virginia, where she and her husband are church planters and founding members of Trinity Reformed Church (CREC).
“But now Christ is risen from the dead, and has become the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. For since by man came death, by Man also came the resurrection of the dead.For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive. But each one in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, afterward those who are Christ’s at His coming. Then comes the end, when He delivers the kingdom to God the Father, when He puts an end to all rule and all authority and power. For He must reign till He has put all enemies under His feet. The last enemy that will be destroyed is death.” (1 Corinthians 15:20-26)
Our Bridegroom is a man of sorrows, acquainted with grief. His creation is, after all, tainted throughout by the great grief-giver: death.
Thursday night, I went to a presentation by a representative from senior counsel with Alliance Defending Freedom. He presented on the implications of several recent court rulings in the United States in the last few years. While most people know about the disturbing ruling of Obergefell, there are several other rulings which have fleshed out how that ruling impacts all areas of family life: parents, children, reproduction, and family history. It is important for Christians to reflect on these things so that we can better understand the time and culture in which we are living.
The representative opened his presentation by addressing the common objection that people make when they hear about these things. People often say: “These issues do not have a direct impact on me so I don’t need to worry about these things yet. When they impact me directly then I will act.” But there are two ways to respond to this. First, when it affects you directly, you don’t need to be warned. You know there is a problem. And second, when that happens, it is too late to change things. You will be eaten up in the system.
The representative then worked through several court cases and rulings.
In 2013, the US Supreme Court, in the Windsor case, found that the “Defense of Marriage Act” was invalid. Justice Kennedy wrote that this act did political harm to those in the minority group of gays. This decision enforced the opinion that it does injury to gay people to make a law defining marriage as only between one man and one woman. This set the stage for Obergefell in 2015.
The speaker then proposed that most people do not understand what Obergefell actually did in its ruling. People usually think that there was a small group of people being excluded from this one category called marriage and that SCOTUS simply welcomed those people into the group. In reality, the Obergefell ruling fundamentally redefined the institution of marriage for everyone. In this ruling, SCOTUS stole the name from the old institution and then applied the old name to this new concept. Contrary to the court’s opinion, it is not adding to the ancient institution of marriage at all. It has created a whole new, modern institution based on the whims and opinions of the court.
The presenter explained that “we have reached rock bottom.” There is nowhere else to fall from here. What we are seeing now is the legal system working out the implications of this ruling. Obergefell was the explosion and these other rulings are the shrapnel flying out.
MargaretAnn Leithart volunteers at the North Jefferson Women’s Center in Fultondale, Alabama. This essay is dedicaed to the Center’s Director, Julie McLendon. This article originally appeared at Theopolis
I have the privilege of being able to counsel a lot of women who are seeking abortions. I can tell you that the majority of them are seeking to end their pregnancies not because they feel like it would be a fun thing to do, but because they are scared out of their minds and feel that they have no other option.
In this episode of the Kuyperian Commentary Podcast, Jesse Sumpter interviews Pastor Toby Sumpter to discuss the Christian’s responsibility on the abortion issue. Pastor Sumpter believes, “We need to pass laws outlawing abortion in our states and then we need to refuse to show up in federal court.”
“What would happen if the Feds started sniffing around the Colorado or Washington State marijuana laws?” asks Pastor Sumpter. “Or what about states that have declared that they will not enforce illegal immigrant laws? I’m pretty sure the states wouldn’t give the Feds the time of day.”
The Idaho pastor notes that current efforts to make progress against abortion are often undermined by the cowardice of American Christians. “We think we need to be nice — but that is not a fruit of the Spirit,” said Sumpter. “We need to be patient, to be kind… but what we need to recognize is that there are more options and tools at hand.”
Another significant obstacle for states like Idaho is the amount of federal funding that the state depends on each year. A legal breech between the state and federal government could jeopardize the billions of dollars the federal government gives to the state. According to Pastor Sumpter, “the feds are paying us to murder 1300 to 1400 babies every year in the state of Idaho… they are bribing us to murder our children. We ought to say ‘no’ and that we won’t sacrifice the life one child for all the money in the world.”
Last Saturday here in London, UK, we read about the heartbreaking case of the youngest victim of the Grenfell Tower tragedy, Logan Gomes. The child of Marcio and Andreia Gomes, Logan was as yet unborn when the fire struck. His mother Andreia was taken to hospital following her escape, where doctors discovered that poisonous fumes from the blaze had claimed the life of the unborn child. Logan was born while Andreia was in an induced coma, and Mr Gomes was faced with the unthinkable task of breaking the news of his youngest child’s death to his wife and the couple’s other daughters, Megan and Luana.
Just a few days previously, we read that “the UK’s largest doctors union”, the British Medical Association, “has called for the complete decriminalisation of abortion and for women to have access to terminations on demand.” The article continues, “If the BMA gets its way, medics would not face criminal sanctions for providing, or women for procuring, an abortion in any circumstances, at any stage in a pregnancy.”
That is to say, the largest union of doctors in the UK is calling for the legalisation of the deliberate killing of children at precisely the same stage of life as young Logan Gomes. The BMA (an association of doctors – people with the job of saving lives) wants the law make abortion legal for any reason whatever, at any stage of pregnancy, right up to birth.
A few days ago, Hugh Hewitt hosted a webinar with Rick Warren and Robert Barron on California’s assisted suicide law, and suicide laws generally. After dealing with the theological and ethical issues at play, Hugh interviews relevant legal experts; identifying appropriate “next steps” for those of us concerned with the sanctity of life. I can’t recommend the webinar highly enough.
There’s not a clear “Christian” way to vote on many things; those laws relating to assisted suicide—like those recently passed in California and Colorado—are not such things. That the End of Life Options Act passed by a 2 to 1 margin in the Centennial State is as grievesome as it is wicked.
My dad—a pastor and chaplain—taught me that our inability to see the dignity and humanity in people as they die says more about our callousness than it does about their direness. As always, legal renewal must be preceded by cultural renewal, which of course must be preceded by spiritual renewal.
In addition to the webinar, I’d recommend two other resources. First, check out Matthew Dickerson’s The Mind and the Machine: What it Means to be Human and why it Matters. While the book is not specifically about assisted suicide, the subtitle should be a clue as to its relevancy. Second, I would recommend picking up Harold OJ Brown’s Sensate Culture (published in ’96), specifically to reference his section on medical ethics. I’ll conclude with an excerpt from Brown:
“Hippocrates himself never spoke of ‘ending suffering’ but only of healing. If human life has no meaning beyond the pleasures and pains of bodily life, if there is nothing to look forward to after death, it is apparent that an excess of suffering will make living seem a burden to be thrown off as speedily as possible… One will reject this convenient solution only if one has ethical fixed stars, such as used to be provided by both the Christian faith and the Hippocratic tradition.
Medicine, like engineering or industrial production, is often considered a technique rather than a philosophy or worldview. In fact, however, medicine brings its practitioners into touch with a broach range of human existence; changes in the culture sooner or later must affect medicine, and changes in medicine cannot fail to affect the entire culture.”
At Providence Church in Pensacola, Fl,[1] we have a regular Vespers’ service on the first Wednesday of each month. We sing the majority of the service, we read three lessons from Scripture– an Old Covenant, New Covenant and Gospel passage–followed by a short homily. This week we read Genesis 1:26-31; 2 Corinthians 5:16-21; and John 3:1-8 and I delivered the homily.
Reading the news of the day, there were a couple stories about men being shot and killed while being arrested or detained by police. I saw some of the responses to those shootings. I began to contemplate what it is that gives men and women, no matter their level of sin or righteousness, dignity. This is what I asked those who were at Vespers…
—–
What is it that gives man dignity? What moves the Church to advocate for the unborn child and the prisoner? What compels us to give honor to the most innocent and the guiltiest, that they should be treated with dignity?
In Genesis 1 God declares that we are created in the image of God. Man was created in goodness and while still pure commanded to take the image of God to the rest of creation. They were to reflect the image of the Creator to His creation that did not bear that image. This is part of the subduing of creation mandated by Holy Spirit. By carrying the authority of God by way of His image, we would participate in Creation, its management, and husbandry. Even without sin man took the image of God to the world.
The fall did not undo this. Man is still to take the image of God out to the world, but with the fall came a haze over our eyes. Blindness is a type of death[2]. We could no longer see properly; not just creation, but we could no longer see God himself in those He created. So, when Cain kills Abel and he is confronted with his sin, he cannot see the value of his brother, his inherent dignity. He slanders him by declaring to God that Abel is not worthy to be watched over, cared for, ministered to… “Am I my brother’s keeper?” (Gen 4:8-9).
This cloudiness of eyesight can affect us as well. It is hard for us to see the image of God in an unborn child or in the man guilty of murder. If we forget that they are both image bearers we can trash them both. We can literally put the most innocent into the garbage, but we can also forget the prisoner; leaving him or her to physical assault and even rape. Turning such humiliation into a joke, we laugh with the world as fellow prisoners or guards strip men and women MADE IN THE IMAGE OF GOD of their dignity, or sounding support with glib comments like “Can’t do the time, don’t do the crime[3].”
When we forget that even the guilty bear the image of God, we can quickly find ourselves supporting or even participating in evil far greater than the crimes perpetrated by these guilty persons. (more…)
The recent shooting at a gay nightclub in Orlando has been labeled the deadliest mass shooting in US history. It’s reported that the gunman killed 49 people and injured at least 53. Most Christians have responded to this tragedy with love and compassion for the victims and their families. Numerous churches and pastors have denounced the violence and are standing in solidarity with the LGBT community.
But as usual, the craziest and most extreme of any group is the loudest. Two pastors have made headlines for their remarks on the Orlando shooting. One says,
“The tragedy is that more of them didn’t die. I’m kind of upset that he [the shooter] didn’t finish the job!”
“I’m not sad about it; I’m not going to cry about it … the victims were going to die of AIDS and syphilis and whatever else; they were going to die early anyway … The bad news is that a lot of the homos in the bar are still alive.”
There is not a square inch in the whole domain of our human existence over which Christ, who is Sovereign over all, does not cry, ‘Mine!’Abraham Kuyper
