Abortion is a topic that brings out strong emotions with
many people. It is a significant factor that many Christians consider when
going to the polls. With the election 2 weeks away, it is helpful to understand
the issues and since this is such a major issue, it should be discussed.
The Holy Post Podcast (Phil Visher from Veggie Tales and
Skye Jethani) posted an informational video about abortion (see link below). Jethani correctly
describes the history of abortion in the US, the downward trend in abortions in
the US regardless of the party of the sitting president, and what the results
would be if the unlikely, Roe vs Wade being overturned, would occur (spoiler
alert: abortion would not be illegal in the US but become a state issue). Since
most pro-life voters point to using fighting abortion, pro-life judges, and
ultimately overturning RvW as their motivation in voting, Visher and Jethani’s video
was created to show how that does not help in reducing abortions in America and
thus, should not be the primary criteria for voting. In fact, some of the
Democratic policies (universal health care and support for the poor) have shown
a greater impact in reducing the number of abortions than the president.
As a response to this video, Andrew Walker, a professor that
came to SBTS after my time there, wrote an article taking issue with some of
the conclusions that were implied through the video (See link below). In pushing back, Walker
sees abortion as a moral evil much like slavery is. Substituted the slavery
into the logic used in the video, we would not be co willing to say that
reducing slavery is acceptable when it is a moral evil. He goes on to say that
Christians should fight with all we have to rid America of this morally
repugnant practice. Fighting to reduce the number is great but making it
illegal should be the ultimate goal.
Both of these posts help further the discussion on this contentious issue and I appreciate their civil discourse. These two perspectives also show the divide in our country’s
believers and most fall into one or the other camp. To me, neither side is
fully compelling. I agree with Visher and Jethani that using abortion as the
only criteria is short-sighted and ignores many other important issues of the
day. However, I reject that the sole goal in voting pro-life is to overturn RvW
and even so, many would welcome the issue becoming a state by state fight
instead of a national one. On the other side, I agree that abortion is a moral
evil and should be fought but I find it troublesome to treat it as a “win at
all costs” issue. This leads us to compromise on other principles just to
possibly win eventually on this one. For example, voting third party is
considered wrong because that takes votes away from the main candidate, which
may cause a pro-choice candidate to win and that is unacceptable. I reject this
approach as well.
So how do we fight abortion without compromising other
biblical principles? I join others and take a middle ground approach. It rests
on the idea that being pro-life is necessary but not sufficient to earn my
vote. Abortion is a moral evil that needs to be made illegal as well as
reducing the numbers. So being pro-life is required for me to support a
candidate. However, it is not the only issue out there. There are many other
issues that need to be discussed including character, racism, immigration, et
al. Thus, a candidate must have other qualities for me to support them other
than just being pro-life and if the main candidates do not have the qualities I
am looking for in a candidate, voting for a third party is a viable solution,
one that I have used and will use in the future.
