The Washington Post has an article about a group of religious leaders in Florida who are suing the state over abortion restrictions with the argument that it violates their religious freedom.
Florida’s new abortion laws do not ban abortions outright (unfortunately). But they do ban abortions after 15 weeks unless there are risks to the health of the mother. But that doesn’t go far enough for these folks.
The article begins:
When the Rev. Laurie Hafner ministers to her Florida congregants about abortion, she looks to the founding values of the United Church of Christ, her lifelong denomination: religious freedom and freedom of thought. She taps into her reading of Genesis, which says “man became a living being” when God breathed “the breath of life” into Adam. She thinks of Jesus promising believers full and abundant life.
Interesting that the article begins by talking about life and the breath of life, and abundant life in an article where pastors are arguing against the right to life of the unborn. We’re alive before we’re born so I’m not sure exactly when all of these rights begin. The Bible also talks about God knowing who we are prior to physical birth.
Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you (Jeremiah 1:5).
For you formed my inward parts; you knitted me together in my mother’s womb. I praise you, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made (Psalm 139:16).
The Lord called me from the womb, from the body of my mother he named my name (Isaiah 49:1).
he who had set me apart before I was born, and who called me by his grace (Galatians 1:15).
I could continue, but you get the point.
The article continues with the “pastor” saying, “I am pro-choice not in spite of my faith, but because of my faith.”
Ah yes, that great Christian virtue of taking life of the unborn. There is no taking of innocent life to the glory of God. It is a backwards misrepresentation of Christianity to argue that it is this great thing to support. I can appreciate that there are Christians who believe in the gospel and who are misguided and have a wrong view of abortion. But it’s a sad commentary when a person is a member of the clergy and is advocating against the rights of the unborn. Not only is she arguing against these rights but she’s arguing that supporting the killing of a baby is something which her faith compels.
In the article, Hafner says, “I think the religious right has had the resources and the voices politically and socially to be so loud, and frankly, they don’t represent the Christian faith,”
I wouild argue that culturally, it is the left who has the loudest voice and they’re the ones who have largely brainwashed our society into thinking hat abortion is this great good. Not just ab ortion but radical beliefs on abortion such as late term abortion, and for any reason. That’s the stance of the Democratic Party.
She says the religious right does not represent the Christian faith. I can appreciate the room for critique, but the Christian left certainly does not represent the Christian faith when its proponents advocate for a whole host of beliefs which are antithetical to historical (and more importantly, Biblical teachings) on sexual ethics.
From the article: “Look biblically; Jesus says nothing about abortion. He talks about loving your neighbor and living abundantly and fully. He says: ‘I come that you might have full life.’
Jesus does say nothing about abortion. So then why ought a professing Christian advocate for it? Shouldn’t we er on the side of life rather than on the side of death?
Love your neighbor? Abundant life? They’re the ones advocating for killing the unborn. I would say to love your neighbor is also to love the unborn.
Jesus said Let the little ones come to me (Luke 18:16).
Jesus said Whatever you did for the least of these, you did for me (Matthew 25:20). Surely the unborn, who are unable to protect themselves and advocate for themselves fall into that category.
There are things that can be done to support the mothers. Christians adopt at higher rates than non Christians. I’m all for also supporting mothers, but not at the expense of the life of the baby.
The article also interviews a Unitarian pastor named Tom Capo who argues,” “It has to do with the belief in the inherent worth and dignity of every human being,” Once again, that’s incoherent. Inherent worth and dignity of every human being? You’re arguing in favor of abortion. You do not believe in inherent worth and dignity. If you believed it was inherent, you’d be pro life. That’s why I am pro life! Because I believe that we actually have inherent worth and dignity. He believes we have acquired worth and dignity at some point.
Also, I thought we were supposed to have separation of church and state? That’s what I always hear. Being pro life is not an inherently religious position. But these religious leaders are the ones beating their chests about how “It’s because I’m religious that I’m pro choice.”
I have no doubt that these people are all very religious but the problem is that their religion is the religion of liberalism and liberalism great sacrament is the right to kill the unborn.
Thanks for reading! If you liked this post, please share and subscribe.