Is the Pro-Life Cause Winning?
— Thursday, January 3rd, 2013 —
This week’s TIME magazine cover story announces that, forty years after Roe, the pro-life side is winning the abortion debate. I say, “Not so fast.”
On the one hand, yes, as the article points out, there have been some real gains in protections for the unborn in some important arenas. And public polling data does demonstrate, rather consistently, that younger people are more willing to identify themselves as being “pro-life” than are their mothers’ generation. This is due partly to sonogram and other technologies that make it harder and harder to maintain that the “fetus” is a clump of impersonal tissue. Whenever evangelical Christians see polls like this, we tend to see some triumphalist rhetoric about how “we’re winning.”
I think it’s more complicated than that.
Yes, it’s a win just that the concept of “pro-life” is still alive. The abortion rights movement probably assumed that forty years after the Supreme Court legalized abortion that the issue would be as settled as school integration or women’s suffrage. It’s still a controversy, and the pro-life side hasn’t been sidelined by history.
And it’s true that there have been some gains in the numbers of doctors who, for conscience reasons, are unwilling to go along with the lie that abortion is “health-care.”
That said, we must remember that the large numbers of self-identified pro-life people might itself in some instances be an indicator of just how embedded the abortion rights culture is in American life.
Here’s why.
It’s easy to identify as “pro-life” when one sees nothing really at stake. For forty years, legal abortion has been securely anchored in American law. Even after the rise of the Religious Right, two Reagan Administrations and three Bush Administrations, abortion is legal everywhere in the United States. With this the case, it is easy for Americans to see the debate as a matter of theory rather than a matter of policy.
I remember having a discussion once with friends about what side I would have taken on the Vietnam war had I been alive in the 1960s. That’s an easy coffee shop discussion to have because I don’t have a draft notice in the mail. I’m not on a campus being mentored by an anti-war professor. I’m not a Cambodian farmer or a south Vietnamese shrimper in danger of being murdered by the Khmer Rouge or the Vietcong.
There are all sorts of politicians who have identified as “pro-life” when all that meant was casting relatively symbolic votes. Former Louisiana Gov. Buddy Roemer and former Idaho Gov. Cecil Andrus, for example, were reliably pro-life, until they were presented with legislation restricting abortion in meaningful ways in their states. At that point, they shifted.
I’m afraid the same is true on the individual level. A feminist leader once said that most Americans are pro-life with three exceptions: rape, incest, and “my situation.” When the teenage daughter is pregnant, the theory is abandoned and bloodthirsty pragmatism rules. I fear this feminist is all too right.
Pharaoh was pro-immigrant until the Israelites threatened what he wanted. The first Herod Administration was pro-Messiah until the actual Messiah threatened his throne. The second Herod Administration was fine with desert prophets until one meddled with his “adult entertainment.” Lots of people are pro-life and pro-child until the lives of children become personally inconvenient.
Does that mean that I, as a pro-lifer, am pessimistic about the future of our engagement on this issue. Not at all.
I just think that we must have a realistic view about how ingrained the abortion-rights worldview is in our culture. We are on the lookout for the ways in which the death culture seeks to circumvent the state of the debate through pernicious new technologies and through the more subtle changes in culture that make children seem to be burden rather than blessing. Knowing the persistence of the abortion culture shows us what we’re up against, but it doesn’t sap our spirit.
The cause of the unborn will triumph, ultimately, because Jesus is alive and justice will win. Until then, polls go up and polls go down. We advocate for life, whether “winning” or not, because life isn’t a government grant or an act of charity granted by the “choice” of another human being.
And we struggle for the protections we can gain for our unborn neighbors as we seek to cultivate a long-term vision of the dignity of all human life in our churches and communities.
To paraphrase the radical curmudgeon Edward Abbey, I am an optimist in the long-run, and by “long-run” I mean the next 5,000 years.
Until then, we work, we plead, we stand, whether we look like winners or not.
35 Responses to “Is the Pro-Life Cause Winning?”
Trackbacks
- What I Read Online – 01/04/2013 (a.m.) | Emeth Aletheia
- Around the Web (1/4) | InGodsImage.com
- The Briefing for Friday 1/4/2013 « Ponder Anew
- Destinations « Luggaged
- SBTS Southern Blogs » Is the Pro-Life Cause Winning?
- Just in Case You Missed It – December 30, 2012-January 5, 2013 « Worldly Saints
- Let Me Direct You Elsewhere… | hisgracemygrowth
- Mere Links 01.07.13 - Mere Comments
- Monday Links and Bullets 1.6.13 « pastorkevinb
- Is the Pro-Life Cause Winning?
- Time Magazine and Abortion | CC Philly - Young Adults Fellowship
- Links I Like | My World
- How to prepare for Grace&Truth gathered, January 20, 2013 | The Grace & Truth Blog
- I. The Spider in the Shadows | Pro-lifist
- ProWomanProLife » Is the pro-life side winning?
- Pro-life news brief 1-22-13
- Roe v. Wade 1973-2013
Interesting article. I am solidly on the “pro-choice” side but it is pleasant to occasionally read an article in which the writer is not foaming at the mouth and spewing hatred for any that disagree with them.
All in all, if this battle of ideas is to be won by the pro-life side it will be by people who can talk and act reasonably on the topic.
Tony Roseman
@Anthony Roseman, Sr.,
I think, Tony, that after 40 years, we have had plenty of time to reason this out. Mankind, sinful as he is, can never reason his way to righteousness. Reason, as Luther once said, is a harlot, and will always prostitute herself for what she desires. We will change, and America will repent of her murderous ways, if and when God is pleased to grant us repentance. Possibly, it will take a national calamity, or should I say further national calamities, to ignite the shock of recognition and a proper sense of horror at the evil we have done. In a billion years, reason could never do this. I still have hope that the great God of judgment and mercy may.
Speaking of Edward Abbey, Abbey correctly saw immigration as the greatest threat to Western nations:
http://compassrosebooks.blogspot.com/2009/10/edward-abbey-on-immigration.html
Western nations can survive abortion (population trends can reverse) but they cannot survive genetic replacement:
http://tinyurl.com/bj9hnx4
God bless!
Sam
@Samantha R., You have the pill, and western culture’s hatred of children, to blame for the declining demographics. Now would be a good time for Americans to start learning more Spanish…
@Samantha R.,
Yes, you’re right that perhaps “Western nations” or cultures may not survive, but at least the Church will. As Timothy Tennent has said, immigrants are probably the biggest hope for the American Church. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WHx95cuXpUE. Cultures, like Kingdoms, rise and fall, but Christ’s church will stand forever.
Jack
@Samantha R.,
In other words, the research includes people are inherently racist (i.e. predisposed to act less altruistically toward those of a different ethnicity) and overall societal altruism (which makes everything work better) will break down in the presence of too ethnically diverse a population.
How does this jive with the heavy waves of immigration the U.S. has experienced in the past? Or, with countries like Canada and Australia that are experiencing higher net migration rates than the U.S. and still seem to be on firm social and fiscal footing? (With much of Canada’s immigration coming from Asia.)
A very good article, and I think you make some good points from a political standpoint that most of the legislation from a “pro-life” standpoint is merely symbolic in nature, especially from so-called pro-life candidates. But I think the issue is much bigger than simply the abortion platform as well. I’ve wondered why it is that in the evangelical church today, you find married elected officer serving that are either deliberately childless, or only chose to bring up one child. Can one truly be “pro-life” if at the same time they shun the blessing of a fruitful womb? (either biologically or adoptive.) What testimony does a married church elder make, in light of the “pro-life” viewpoint, when he and his wife willingly decide not to raise any children? The abortion issue is big… but I wonder sometimes if an issue like this is just as big, but avoided being taboo?
@Neophytos, I completely agree with you!
@Neophytos, Completely agree with you. Check out this clip talking about that specifically.
http://www.canonwired.com/featured/childless-couple/
I pray for the day Child Sacrifice is made illegal. The reality is abortion clinics could be put out of business simply by requiring a few regulations: elevator, wider halls, 24 hour surveillance after abortion process begun, etc would put the clinics immediately out of business–the cost of an abortion, 1st trimester is about $420–the market will not bear an increase in cost and hefty regulations would force clinics to raise prices/go out of business. The clinics are granted waivers so they do NOT comply with ambulatory surgical facility requirements. Spare the Constitutional argument.
I believe that our nation’s current abortion statistics, and even the self-preferred title of pro-CHOICE, represents perhaps the most drastic and easily recognizable rebellions against God of any nation in history. Placing our own desires, needs, preferences and choices above the value of another life, and proclaiming that we have the right to end a life, that God has begun, at the time of our choosing, is one of the most blatant forms of self-worship idolatry and open rebellion imaginable.
It is this same self-worship that is responsible for the rise in popularity and acceptance of homosexuality as being “normal” and attempting to remove it from the realm of immorality. In homosexual attractions, one “worships” his/her own image even in their sexual desires. They rebel against God’s most basic created design, and seek their own image in their sexual desires.
Both show the rampant self-consumed, individualistic culture that is plaguing America. Our only hope is awakening and revival of our hearts by the gospel of Christ. We are literally worshipping ourselves to death. May God gives us eyes to see and ears to hear soon and may we be busy about bringing the Good News to those who stand in the consequential wake of devastation left from these storms of rebellion.
Dr. Moore, overall this was a good article. However, I’m thinking that you are probably a bit to pessimistic. You mention the teenager or young woman who is inconvenienced by an unexpected pregnancy, yet statistically, these women are much, much more likely to have their babies and give them up for adoption. Or they are much more likely not to be thrown out of the their homes and can count on the help of the grandparents in helping to raise the child. I’m not saying that the tide has turned completely, obviously, but the social stigmas are not nearly as aweful as they were in the the idolized days of Ozzie and Harriet. Also, the church and other non-profit organizations have created a large network of crisis pregnancy centers that help women get the supplies and help that they need to make the decision not to abort.
The feminist argument that “my situation” = pro choice is not a given today, even among non-church goers. It really just isn’t.
We’re delusional if we think that the pro-abortion side isn’t winning. Let’s not forget all the babies that are killed by chemical means instead of surgical. Abortifacent drugs are likely killing more babies than surgical abortions. You don’t need to go to Planned Parenthood to get an abortion. You can go to a Target or Walmart.
And you know what else, it’s only a matter of time until some scientist in the US or foreign country discovers some medical knowledge using stem cells from aborted babies. The fact that this is evil doesn’t mean it’s not effective. After that happens, we’ll not only be anti-woman for opposing abortion, we’ll be anti-medicine.
@Paul Reed,
One cannot forget the current argument in favor of infanticide, as the next logical step after abortion. This argument is being made right now, and an article has been published in its favor in a medical ethics journal http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/9113394/Killing-babies-no-different-from-abortion-experts-say.html
I agree with Dr Moore’s position.
Dr. Moore:
Thank you so much for writing this. I agree wholeheartedly. I think the whole perception of reproduction in our churches is messed up.
My wife and I have four children, and we have had them in rather rapid succession. Our oldest is 6 and our youngest is 8 months. I have endured icy stares from people who think we should not have this many children. I have endured backhanded comments that suggest my wife cannot take care of our children or anymore for that matter. I never expected this kind of treatment from “Christian” people, but it exists, and I think in some cases discourages good young couples from having more children. The “don’t you know how to keep that from happening” comments are cute at first, but the 50th comment can be irritating.
We also have pastors who preach hypocritically about anti-abortion, but cannot preach a word about reproduction and the value of having children. They just want to gripe about abortion. All this to say, I believe, if we want to win the abortion debate, we need to start with winning the reproduction debate.
After having watched you on the video “Forum: The Pastor and Politics” here: http://www.russellmoore.com/2012/10/26/forum-the-pastor-and-politics/ , I’m wondering if the Russell Moore in the video is the same man who wrote this blog post.
Here’s what I’m referring to;
While Gov. Romney was clearly no one’s perfect candidate, he did present a clear alternative to Pres. Obama on the matter of abortion. And, for several reasons, this was a watershed election in attempts toward a more originalist Supreme Court. Now, with the most pro-abortion President in our nation’s history, that opportunity has likely escaped us for 1-2 generations (do some quick math on the number of children that will be slaughtered in that time).
In the video that I linked to, you did not raise this alarm and appeared to suggest that Romney couldn’t be counted on on this issue (as opposed to the alternative?) regardless of the repeated statements by Gov. Romney that his appointees would of the Robert Bork model.
Yet, in this blog posting, you state that we struggle to find ways to protect the unborn.
As an influence on a number of conservative evangelicals in the nation, you had an opportunity to make it very clear as to the urgency of this recent election on the issue of protecting the unborn…and the reason that you did not escapes me. The election of 2012 had stakes similar to that of the election of 1860. The primary difference between the two elections concerns the clarity of urgency and unity by evangelicals. In 1860, among evangelicals who saw abolition of slavery as important, there was clarity. In 2012, among evangelicals who see the abolition of abortion as important, there was neither clarity nor unity.
Dr. Mohler was right. The 2012 election was a disaster for religious conservatives. But also in a way that he did not mention: it was a disaster for the credibility for the leaders of religious conservatives.
Thanks for pointing out the Time article.
Truly one of the horrific defilements on our land is shedding of innocent blood. Living in the state of Colorado and understanding that this death culture was birthed out of our state legislature in April 25, 1967; there is a light arising from the Personhood USA movement. This was also birthed several years ago in this state, to God be the glory.
I would suggest that you give Dan Becker, National Field Director a look. personhoodusa.com. He has written Personhood; a pragmatic guide to prolife vicotry in the 21st century and the return to first principles in politics.
I say it is time for the church to repent and wake up and step into the truth and confess and turn from our immoratlity, idolatry, broken covenents and bloodshed sins.
I trust 2 Chronicles 7:14 (Philp. 1:9; James 5:16)
War against women- who have not seen the light of of day and never will. God wanted that child alive to help us all on our way-
especially mother and dad.
God help us stop the killing -how can he bless the USA? Have
mercy on us Lord.