The focus of conservatives, Christians, and Christian conservatives (which are not always one in the same), has at least been somewhat unified in a pro-life stance for decades. The dividing that has resulted is based on how to approach it.
Roe V. Wade was a court case decided in 1973. It is not law and it certainly is not “the law of the land”, contrary to what now-sitting Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch stated during his confirmation hearings.
It was a court decision on a case and it was entered into the books of the Supreme Court as a legal opinion. (There were dissenting opinions from Justices Byron White and William Rehnquist.) Henceforth, all decisions based on abortion use Roe V. Wade as precedent. Roe V. Wade was never intended to be the basis for abortion on demand, but because it has loopholes as numerous as Swiss cheese, it ended up allowing abortions to be done without justification. Just like no fault car accidents are covered by insurance.
What had been the hope of the pro-lifers since the bastardization of Roe to include abortion on demand, was a repeal by the SCOTUS upon the seating of a conservative majority. When Justice Scalia, who would have been a definite yes voter on the repeal side, died unexpectedly, it would only make sense for a Republican president to replace him with an equally conservative justice.
In spite of Gorsuch’s mostly conservative rulings in his shortened first term on the SCOTUS, he might be hesitant to actively seek to repeal Roe V. Wade, which he deems “the law of the land”. Add to that the fact that both Anthony Kennedy and Ruth Bader Ginsberg, a moderate and a liberal respectively, both announced that they would not be retiring in the near future, and we may not get another chance to create a more conservative bench under Trump.
One more shortfall to consider is the likelihood that Gorsuch is Trump’s most conservative pick, and anyone else will be more moderate, to appease his mixed base and RINO’s in Congress. The GOP members holding seats on average have made quite noticeable steps to the left in compromises and concessions since Trump took office, and some did under Obama as well.
I said all that to say this: It’s time to focus on another way to approach saving unborn children. Repealing Roe V. Wade is not likely because if it isn’t done now, it won’t be anytime soon. Instead of trying to approach this from the top down, perhaps we need to address the problem at its roots, as we should have been doing from the start.
Let’s roll up our sleeves and become active in our communities. Don’t shame the girls who became pregnant. Don’t yell at them and point fingers and say, “Your CHOICE was when you went in the bedroom!” There before the grace of God… and you all know what I mean by that.
Let them know they have a choice, but show them why not aborting is the best choice. Show them the pride and love they can achieve by giving another person an entire life and a future. We also especially need to not drop the ball the minute the baby is born, but to help and encourage that mother through the first few months to by teaching her how to be a good mother to an infant.
This is not to say that we enable her to have a bunch of babies. We also need to teach responsibility and to hopefully bring the father into the picture. Usually that’s not an option, so we need to teach young women about respecting their bodies going forward so that the next time there is a man in their lives, its serious business before anything like a baby is a possibility. Marriage serious.
But it’s a process. Baby steps are needed. And professionals can help. For the first time ever, according to Jay Sekulow, attorney for the American Center for Law and Justice, and radio talk show host, The Department of Health and Human Services has defined life as starting at conception. This is a major hurdle as it is a government agency. We can now tell pregnant women this fact as a talking point, which directly contradicts the lies of Planned Parenthood.
My longtime friend, Barbara Lovell Cowne, a full time nurse, takes time out of her busy schedule to go to strategic locations in the Tampa area near abortion clinics in a portable ultrasound van and provide free ultrasounds. The professional volunteers offer pregnant mothers what the abortion clinics do not, a chance to see an ultrasound and hear a heartbeat of their own unborn babies. Also they receive heartfelt counseling and not just an abortion commercial.
Approaching pregnant women who are confronted with a choice with an outreach of love, options and individual attention may just be giving them the attention they so desperately need. Many have nowhere to turn and in desperation have concluded that an abortion is their only option. Showing them this is not the case, one by one, we can bring back a respect and love for life.
I want to close this article with some words sent to me by Paul Downs, a friend on Facebook who understands this issue, and how a grassroots approach is so much more sensible than trying to pound away with a toothpick at a 1973 Supreme Court opinion with a bench of unwilling justices:
“America has been polarized enough in the last few years. It’s getting worse. What our country needs is a common language. Focusing on what splits us is no longer acceptable. JFK was so successful, largely in part, because he resonated with the general populous on several key points.
Although I have rarely agreed with compromising key conservative principles, there are better ways to implement our ideas to the population at large. One of those ways to communicate across our diverse land is through incentives.
Let’s take the issue of abortion, for example. Upholding God’s Word on this issue is admirable, but we’ve got to be careful as conservatives, to study each issue in Biblical context.
2 Timothy 2:15 (KJV): “Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.”
One of the key principles of conservatism used to be the idea of incentive as a motivating factor in our society. In consideration of the subject of abortion, we have two choices to affect change. We can either force our citizenry to behave, by law, or we can find a way to incentivize them toward a lawful, moral end.
- 1: Coercion has more often than not, been the tactic of the Left.
- 2: Incentive has traditionally, been the modus operandi of the Right.
What does the Bible say?
2 Chronicles: 7:14 (KJV) “If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from Heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.”
In this oft-quoted scripture, we see a conditional statement: “If…then…” which shows us that if a people will “humble“, “pray“, “seek” and “turn“, then God will bless them, “hear“, “forgive“, “heal“. God provides an incentive for us to act in a certain manner toward Him. He does not force us to conform to His will. We either accept it or reject it. It’s up to us.
The greatest incentive in the Universe is found in John 3:16 (KJV) “For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.”
The voluntary action of believing is the incentive which yields that most beautiful word.
A portion of the Lord’s Prayer is a prime example of the fact that God’s will is separate from ours. Matthew 6:10 (KJV) “Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done, in earth as it is in Heaven…”
In praying thus, we are asking for God’s will to be carried out on earth. His will is not forced upon us.
Therefore, incentive is not only a conservative principle, but it is a Biblical one too.
There are some who are rigidly idealistic and therefore punitive when it comes to a remedy for abortion. But history has shown that a diverse populous responds more readily to incentive than force. Working with human nature works better whether its an entire country or its a child given a piece of candy as an incentive to mow the lawn. It’s opting for the carrot instead of the stick.
Why not try education, state mandated ultrasounds, and waiting periods to stem the flow of abortions on demand? Choice should require thoughtful deliberation. Time is a teacher.
In a harsh world that often sanctions all manner of violence toward selfish ends, shouldn’t the most innocent, defenseless members of our society deserve mothers who are positively incentivized toward life-giving nurture as opposed to imposing a penalty?“