— Mission Statement — Providing straightforward analysis on the intersection of contemporary issues and theology, based on a Biblical Christian Worldview.
“[Freedom] is ours by right, and that includes the fundamental freedom of a woman to be able to make decisions about her own body and not have her government telling her what to do.”
Vice President Kamala Harris speaking at a campaign event in Atlanta, GA in September (details here).
Three Foundational Points at the Outset
First, there are times when abortion should be an option. That has more to do with living and navigating through the world than it does allowing women to have autonomous control over their bodies, as Harris and others suggest.
Second, abortion is not a core issue for a Biblical Christian (details here). Whether or not one believes abortion is a sin will not result in their acceptance or rejection by God. Yes, we all can agree with what the Bible clearly says, or, we can reject Scripture as written by man and is therefore irrelevant. The latter makes it harder to believe in God’s grace and our faith in Jesus Christ as the only (narrow) path to His eternity. The former gives believers a self-righteous plank in their eye (Matthew 7:3-5) while attempting to show their neighbors, Christian love. The truth is that we all have areas of theology that are suspect, and if a believer cannot admit this truth, that is the sin of pride revealing itself.
Three, regardless of how you choose to interpret this article, I am NOT a Trump fan.
Limits to Individual Freedoms in America
Taking the hot topic of abortion out of the conversation, the fact is that we are not free to do whatever we want with our bodies. When someone shoots another person in the act of robbing them, law enforcement should arrest and restrain the perpetrator to prevent further illegal actions. This is but one example demonstrating that we are not always free to do whatever we wish with our bodies.
If we are not harming others, or ourselves to some degree, we have a tremendous amount of freedom, protected by the US Constitution (life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness). However, the government maintains the right and responsibility to intervene to protect those who would otherwise be harmed by our actions. So the question of abortion does not hinge on a woman’s freedom to choose. The real question… is there one person making a decision for themselves or for themselves and another (the fetus)?
When is it the responsibility of the government to step in to protect the rights of the innocent who have no ability to protect themselves?
Individual Freedoms as Relates to Abortion
The question is not about the rights of women to control their bodies. Instead, it is about the responsibility of the government to step in to protect those who are not able to protect themselves. Using phrases such as ‘women’s rights’ or ‘my body, my choice’ as a cudgel or intended moral superiority is an intentional misdirection of the facts of human nature and broader societal responsibilities.
Abortion is not an issue of who controls our bodies, but what “our bodies” represent. Is a woman carrying a separate life within her solely responsible for that life until some arbitrary point? Or does that life have rights separate from the woman? Simply put, does the fetus have human rights that deserve protection? And, if so, at what point in the gestation process?
Abortion from a Secular Perspective
Taking religion out of the equation entirely, when should life be protected… a question no different than when someone was shot in the commission of a robbery. When should society’s justice impose itself on an individual’s rights? In the case of abortion, when do the rights of the unborn reach a level where society should stand between the mother and her future child? If the range is from conception to delivery, where is the line between individual freedom and societal intervention? Should the US federal government be making that decision or should states or counties or… just how granular should that determination be? Many would argue it should be singular.. the mom and perhaps her doctor. How would that apply to the example above when an innocent victim is shot and killed? Should the killer have the freedom to decide his own punishment?
What if the person shot was pregnant and both died?
Today, in America, there is a “Born Alive Law” on the books in approximately 70% of states that treat the death of an in utero fetus as if it was murdered after birth (details here).
“The basis for such laws stems from advances in medical science and social perception, which allow a fetus to be seen and medically treated as an individual in the womb and perceived socially as a person, for some or all of the pregnancy.”
Quoting from Wikipedia
Abortion from a Biblical Christian Perspective
“One does not have to abandon their faith or deeply held beliefs to agree the government should not be telling her what to do with her body.”
Vice President Kamala Harris speaking during the “Fight for Reproductive Freedoms” tour (details here).
One must reject the integrity of the Bible to accept abortion as acceptable to God. The list of verses framing a picture of God having knowledge of human life prior to birth (Jeremiah 1:5) and the significance of murder (Exodus 20:13), is long and decisive (details here). However, as stated at the beginning of this brief article, we live in a world full of sinful behavior that is not in line with God. Fortunately, He has provided a solution for all our sins to be forgiven through the sacrificial death of His Son on the cross (details here). Finally, many believe babies that do not come to term will be in Heaven (details here).
Conclusion
The simple principle offered here is that the subject of abortion is not one of women’s independence, but where the line is between the rights of two individuals, the woman, and the fetus. If there is a line to be drawn, then Ms. Harris’ view that “the government has no right to tell a women what to do with their body” is incorrect.
