The Moment Pro-Life Voters Become Pro-Abortion
by Motte Brown on 10/21/2008 at 5:12 PM
Can you be "pro-life" and vote for a "pro-abortion" candidate? It's a question considered by Gerard V. Bradley writing for The Witherspoon Institute in this article. The answer is yes, you can be pro-life and vote for a pro-choice candidate. But the moment you do, you essentially become "pro-abortion". Here's why:
The "pro-life" voter who votes for a "pro-choice" candidate materially -- that is, in fact and as a matter of foreseeable effect -- cooperates in sustaining this country's radically defective legal structure about abortion. Take the case of presidential elections. Voting for a "pro-choice" candidate helps him to win the presidency, and helping him to win the presidency is, perforce, to help him make his declared "pro-choice" policies a reality (or, to the extent such policies are in place, to help him to block efforts to repeal them). The "pro-life" voter who votes for a "pro-choice" candidate knowingly declines to do what he or she can do to legally protect the unborn from being killed-namely, to vote for a "pro-life" candidate (if one is running).
We've been having an internal discussion at Boundless on the culpability of Christians who knowingly support a pro-abortion president. Here's the question we're pondering: When a pro-abortion president they helped elect signs legislation which directly leads to more abortions, do those Christians have blood on their hands?
101. Jeff said the following at 6:54 PM on Oct 24:
I decline to answer the question. However, our first objective when it comes to electing any invidual into office is where he/she stands on "morals" or biblical truth. I might not agree with the economic plans the candidate has. But, this country must stand on biblical truth first rather than economics/national security/etc. For a person to be pro-life and vote for a pro-choice candidate allows questions for scrutiny. Remember "LIFE, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness"...morals first than economics.
102. Sharde said the following at 9:08 PM on Oct 24:
The comment regarding capital punishment as being scriptural using references from Leviticus is false and completely misleading. The scripture was clearly legislation under the dispensation of the law. We are now under the dispensation of grace and are no longer bound to the law of sin and death, although our God is a God of judgement as well as grace and mercy.
Romans 8:2 says that "the law of the Spirit of of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death."
Now note I am not saying that we should continue in sin that grace may abound (Romans 5), but the Bible explicitly speaks about us no longer being under the school master of the law (Galatians 3).
We all need to make sure that we are dividing the Word of God correctly under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, and NOT to justify our own beliefs or causes.
103. Melissa said the following at 9:39 PM on Oct 24:
I found it very distracting that the article discussed Pro-Life vs Pro-Abortion. There is no such thing as Pro-Abortion . .it is Pro-Choice.
104. Joe said the following at 10:51 PM on Oct 24:
We have a pro-life president and he has been in office for eight years. Are abortions still legal? Yes. So if this logic is true then why doesn't voting in a pro-life candidate lead to pro-life legislation? Especially when "pro-life" representatives hold majority at both the executive and legislative branches this should be true, but it isn't.
105. Mimi said the following at 10:28 AM on Oct 25:
When the republicans won the two houses and the presidency, I thought to myself, FINALLY, some restrictions to abortions will be passed. They had SIX years to do something. The did address partial birth, which accounts for less than .5% of all abortions, but NOTHING else!
I ask you, don't you feel used? They use you for your vote, yet do NOTHING to reduce abortions when they had the chance. And while saying they are pro-life they enter in a war that killed and displaced tens of thousands. Helping to spread radical islam.
Just imagine if our so called "Christian" leaders had acted like Christ after 911 - and instead of responding with our might we instead showed love of our enemies! Christ was a certainly a radical for his time and ours. If we had responded with LOVE like he told us to do, just imagine how the world today would be different? Imagine how we could have spread His word, how damaging it would be to Islam.
Imagine if we were truly "Pro-life" in all things we do.
Those Iraqi's their lives have value, God knitted them together too. God is NOT pro-America!
I pray that you ask for God to give you a heart of mercy, and that you see all life as valuable, not only the unborn.
106. Naomi said the following at 11:12 AM on Oct 25:
Again, I'm not American but looking at this post and the comments here, I can't help but notice two things:
#1
If America had a chief executive who signed the Freedom of Choice Act legalizing abortion for all of the United States, this will be a historic event for the world.
My country would be one example who would use this law as a benchmark like we used to do most of our laws (being a former American Commonwealth.)
Once something as vague as abortion is signed as legal into law and transpired into the WORLD's process, this is now not an issue of what's legal or what's not. This is now an issue of what's right or wrong.
And in God's view, ABORTION IS WRONG. It's that simple.
Even pro-choice people do not disprove that a fertilized zygote is NOT conception. They simply go towards the argument that this is a woman's body and a woman therefore has choice over it.
#2
I've seen some terms such as "Religious Conservatives" being used elsewhere in these comments section where the context seems to point that some of us on this board lead toward extremism.
I say that I hope those people who use this term to be careful at such accusation and generalization because those are simply incorrect.
107. Megan G said the following at 11:28 AM on Oct 25:
To supplement my earlier comment #8, I just recieved a copy of the ESV study bible today and they have a wonderful section in the back about the bible and ethical issues. They disscuss issues including abortion, war, and capital punishment and according to their research, abortion is the only issue on which Christian's clearly do not have any biblical ground to stand on to support. I recommend that everyone posting here to read these notes, no matter where you stand on these issues currently. I found them to be really informative. Thanks Boundless for letting me know about the ESV study bible - I've owned it for less than a day and already found it helpful!
108. farmer Tom said the following at 11:36 AM on Oct 25:
Sharde, You are mistaken to assert that since we are now under grace that the death penalty is no longer applicable.
First, God established the death penalty prior to the law given to the Jewish people. See Genesis 9.
Second, it is clear in Romans 13 that one of the responsibilities of proper government is to "bear the sword" against them that do evil, (take human life). And no attempts to equate "bearing the sword with prison or some other such foolishness. The sword is an instrument of death and is clearly a reference to depriving the evil of that most precious thing life.
Thirdly, when Jesus was before Pilate, in John 19:10 and 11 He said,
" 10 Then saith Pilate unto him, Speakest thou not unto me? knowest thou not that I have power to crucify thee, and have power to release thee?
11 Jesus answered, Thou couldest have no power at all against me, except it were given thee from above: therefore he that delivered me unto thee hath the greater sin."
Jesus was saying that yes Pilate had the power to take His (Jesus') life and that that power was given to him by God himself. He did not say that the death penalty was wrong or wicked, rather he affirmed the right of the God ordained government to deprive someone of life.
Reconsider your anti-death penalty arguments, you are incorrect.
109. Jean Huber said the following at 1:46 PM on Oct 25:
http://www.cny.org/archive/eg/eg102308.htm
A picture is worth a thousand words!
110. Greg Coe said the following at 10:44 PM on Oct 25:
As terrible as abortion is, an aborted baby is spending eternity in Heaven. Jesus calls us to be "fishers of men", ie unsaved souls. An unborn child's soul is never in jeopardy. I wish we would focus more of our time and resources reaching out to those who dont know Christ. When is the last time you picketed a Muslim mosk or Jewish temple, rather than an abortion clinic? Those souls are at risk, not the aborted soul at Planned Parenthood.
111. Leah said the following at 10:55 PM on Oct 25:
Melissa, if you read the comments, you'll find some people specify that they are pro-abortion rather than pro-choice.
Editor- why didnt my last post get posted? I was hoping it would clarify my view on abortion in politics, because a lot of people obviously misunderstood it and attacked me for it.
112. Joseph said the following at 10:38 AM on Oct 26:
To DP-
As one at the forefront of the Iraq War I can assure you, every rule/action than can safely be done to protect the innocent Iraqis is and has been in place. The difficult thing is preventing those who wish to do Iraqis harm by blowing up cars in the middle of a shopping center...
113. Christian said the following at 8:15 PM on Oct 26:
I'm not trying to say that the babies killed by abortion are any more important then an innocent person killed in war. However, more people/babies have been killed by abortion from 1973(Roe vs. Wade) to this day, then all the Americans killed in armed conflict since the founding of this nation. The Holocaust is seen as the worst slaughter of a population in human history, however close to 10 times as many babies have been murdered by abortion.
114. Tony said the following at 9:51 PM on Oct 26:
The right of innocent life to exist is paramount. It would seem to trump all other issues. The needs of the poor, or those without Health insurance, temporary setbacks in the economy.Unfortunately war is inevitable due to the fallen nature of man. God allowed it and even seems to have endorsed its use in the Old Testament, even after he gave the Ten Commandments. One of which is Thou shall not kill. If God meant that to cover war situations, then he is contradicting himself by supporting wars Israel was involved with after Moses day. I dont think God is in contradiction. Not that every war is just, but unless you can know the consequences of a war not being waged, how can you know that is wasnt a good idea. It may have provided a strong deterrence against future attacks on the nation. While there are no perfect choices available, I cant support anyone who clearly opposes biblical principles which appear so clearly. I believe the Bible(the Word of God) is in clear opposition to Abortion, Homosexuality, and Euthanasia. I cant find a single scripture to support any of these activities. If Jesus were in the room with you would you tell him that you do?
115. j said the following at 5:59 AM on Oct 27:
Well, let's see...
If one were to be pro-choice:
Woman-with-choice No. 1 suddenly 'chooses' not to have baby, and thus has the baby and leaves it in a toilet or a field... media AND pro-choice people scream about murder.
Woman-with-choice No. 2 'chooses" not to have baby and therefore goes to a "clinic" to have it's brains sucked out, or whatever...
How is this NOT murder?
At any rate, I am not thrilled with either candidate, but I am not voting for someone who has stated for certain that FOCA will be signed because babies are a "punishment."
Furthermore, for those of you who want free/forced healthcare and all of that: perhaps you should look at how well that is working out in Massachusetts, Canada, and England...
116. Alicia said the following at 11:52 AM on Oct 27:
Wouldn't a pro-life candidate be against a war that kills thousands of innocent people? How do you vote for a pro-life candidate who isn't really pro-life at all with a clear conscience and bloodless hands?
Saving lives through accessible health care, education and ending a deadly war is what will actually happen in the next 4 years. Either the pro-life candidate, or the pro-choice candidate (in this election year) has too much on his plate to do anything real about abortion- I feel that it's a backburner issue. We need to consider what is the most important, and work out those issues first.
I'm not saying abortion isn't a HUGE issue. But I am saying that voting based on the one issue, doesn't help anything- look at the big picture.
117. A.M.C. said the following at 12:35 PM on Oct 27:
Re: Farmer Tom (#8 on Page 3, or #108)
While I do understand that the death penalty has biblical support, I still see two problems associated with it:
1. It is irreversible. Thus, there is always a possibility that someone wrongfully accused could be executed. That's not justice.
2. Even if the suspect is rightfully accused, I'm uncomfortable about the eternal consequences carrying out the death penalty on an unsaved person. (Translation: Wouldn't the execution guarantee that the criminal would end up in hell?) To me, life in prison would be a better option, if only for the possibility that the criminal would later accept Christ.
118. Lucy said the following at 10:22 PM on Oct 29:
Let me try again...
Does pro-life mean that you believe that even if there are health risks (fatal) if she has the child...she should not have the right to abort?
My friend says that she believes that abortion should not be allowed for ANY reason...not even if the mother's health is at risk.
I asked her...what if it were her...she said...even if it were her...she'd choose life for the child.
What do others have to say about it?
You don't know what I think...because I haven't told you...because I like to keep the door open to hear any points of view.