I wasn’t sure if I should show my hand at the top of this blog. At first, I’d though I’d bury the lead and be clever about where I’m going with this particular blog post. I’d give you my thoughts, that would hopefully sway you towards my point of view, then at the end, BOOM! Drop the mic and leave all two of my readers in a better place that would last the rest of their lives. Ultimately I decided against this. With the recent public discourse around abortion, and specifically around the fury surrounding the Center for Medical Progress’s expose of Planned Parenthood’s illegal profiting, I though it’d be best to put the thesis of my feelings in the title.
Now this is a theology blog, and some may say that this isn’t the place for theology, and they would be wrong. Everything is formed by the highest imaginable thought. The highest imaginable thought, is God, or some might saying meaning or purpose, but really it’s that attempt to get to the central idea of everything, God. As a result, every thought that flows from that original highest thought is theological. The fact that everything you believe can first be divided into two by starting with “Do you believe in God?”, means that every thought or action proceeding that first question, is theological in its conception.
With abortion, we simply follow the logic. IF there is a God, and IF he has revealed himself to be the Christian God, and then IF the bible is true, then it would seem to assert that all humans, and potential humans (fertilized eggs), are image bearers of that God, or at least potential image bearers. As such, they inherently have the right to life that the ONLY the maker of the image has the moral authority to bestow or take away. Now some would obviously argue the morality of this God, but that is for another blog, so I’ll ask you to please stay in the vein of this particular discussion.
Following this internal logic of the orthodox christian worldview, this would mean that any attempt to stop an image bearer from reaching their potential as an image bearer, that is NOT ordained by the maker of that image, is treason against that maker, also commonly called SIN. (In simple terms, God makes and gives life, and is the only one allowed to give it or take it away.)
There has been plenty of “He said, she said” through this public discussion.
“Oh, no we do not profit from illegal selling of dead baby body parts.”
“Well, what about this video?”
“That video is heavily edited!”
“Well here then, what about the full unedited video that in full context says the same thing?”
“Ummmm…”
Now I don’t blog too much, to which some of you may say “Yeah, we can tell.” I wish I could blog more, but time in my life is of short supply, so I only blog when something seems to be missing from the conversation. After both sides have picked their talking points (some more valid than others), and I’m left somewhere between the two with my hand raised saying, “Well what about this?”
For me, I try to get into people’s heads. In this particular case I might ask “How does a doctor or medical professional justify such acts?” To this I think the answer is simple, we just follow the logic of the pro-choice view.
The logic is as follows.
IF a baby is not a baby, but just a fetus, and that fetus is just a random bit of cellular material cobbled together and called tissue, then there should be no moral question when it comes to selling off, or destroying this tissue. IF it is just tissue, than it (the baby) is no different than a tumor being removed from a host. Or if you were to scrape your knee, and a great gash is caused, and a chunk of skin is peeled loose, dead baby tissue is no different than that chunk. Therefore, we should not make a fuss or mourn over it’s loss. After all, no one cries over loosing a tumor. This IS the train of logic of the pro-choice position. What happens internally to a person as they convince themselves of this logic is another thing.
To kill a baby we must first convince our gut that we are not killing a baby, so we must first recast what a baby is. So in the minds of some, a baby is no different than cancer, it’s merely tissue. Let that sink in. My five daughters, and one baby boy, for those who would say that this is okay, at one point in their development, believe that my children had no more value than cancer. So for my pro-choice friends, next time you see a child, or perhaps your own child, look them in the eye and tell them that at one point, before they were born, when they were very very small, that you thought of them in the same way that you do a tumor. Then ask yourself, what has changed that makes you no longer consider them a tumor?
The question then must be asked, “assuming that all babies are just tissue, and all tissue is equal, then why is baby tissue sometimes kept, then raised, and loved over other tissue? Should we also keep, love and raise tumor tissue? If not, then what is the difference?” Is there some intrinsic worth or value that baby tissue has over other tissue that may make it worthy of love? If so, then we must rethink our position and admit that baby tissue is dramatically different from other tissue. For now however, for the sake of argument, lets continue with this logic train in light of this most current fiasco.
If I were an oncologist (cancer doctor in layman’s terms), and I were to remove a tumor (tissue) from a patient, then after that surgery, a research group were to approach me and say, “Hey, can we have that tumor, when can study it and learn from it, and heck, we will even give you $50 bucks for it, and if you have any more, we will pay you for those too!” This is the logic behind these videos, this is how one can sale baby parts like it’s no big deal. A baby, is no different than a tumor, so why does it matter if I sell it? I would agree, it doesn’t matter at all, IF that were truly the case. (In this blog you should always pay close attention to the “If”s )
What is curious though, is the overwhelming moral outrage, yes from those conservatives, but also from those liberals, who, up until the talking points where finally hashed out, were remarkably quite. Now some did speak up, but only against the calloused and casual nature of which the planned parenthood leaders spoke, not to the horrors that they were speaking of, just that they should of been more considerate in the way the spoke of it. Unfortunately they did not think back through all the faulty logic that led to the “pro-babies are just tumors” position. Perhaps from political pressures, surly they don’t want to upset their financial backers, or maybe even deeper, they don’t want to admit that they are wrong. IF they were to completely retract their position, it would also be an admission that the “tumor babies” are human beings, and that up and to this point, they have advocated, and supported funding for, the murder of those humans. This is a hard pill for anyone to swallow.
As usual, the bible shows us that this is exactly how the minds of people, plagued by sin, would react. We blame-shift, minimize our part in the activity, maximize our other virtues, and simply skirt around the main issue, “This is an attack on women’s health!” Even though no one is suggesting that they end any of those other services, and ignoring the fact that it does not matter if a murderer gives millions to charity, he is still a murderer. We don’t call our sin “sin”, we recast it as a moral failure, a mistake, or a lapse in judgement. This is very similar to the way we recast a baby as nothing more than a tumor, and as we do, we sear our consciences up, and become more calloused, maybe to the point to where we can casually sip wine and eat food as we discuss how we crush a baby in such a specific way to keep most of him in tact.
The most recent, “as the bible would predict” moment, has been for Planned Parenthood to point to the other services, as mentioned before, that Planned Parenthood offers saying, “Look at all the good we do”, claiming that “abortions only make up a mere 3% of our services!” Now this is a good rabbit hole to go down, but I wont, because Kevin DeYoung already has pointed out how we should be suspect when an organization provides its own numbers for us to believe, and even shows how these numbers are myths. Furthermore, these other services, as Dr. Ben Carson pointed out, should be readily available through other legislation passed by our current commander and chief.
All that being said, at it’s best, Planned Parenthood, is funded by your tax dollars, even if you object of their activities, and is most likely is profiting from further illegal activities. Under current legislation, it’s other services are moot because they can be found anywhere, and is possibly fundamentally racist in its targeting of key low-income demographics. This doesn’t even bring into full account the morality of the central issue of abortion, but all things being equal, lets assume that abortion is no different that adoption.
These two options seem to be the primary options when it comes to babies who’s parents, for whatever reason, are unable to provide for them or simply don’t want them. So for the sake of thought, lets give them complete equality in merit and value and morality. Now lets say there is potential for you to profit from abortion through selling baby tissue, and in this scenario, there is no moral question or law in place to prohibit that sale. Which do you, as a counselor/provider, hope your client picks? Which one do you, potentially try to sway them towards? The profitable abortion, or the unprofitable adoption? Now I am not asking for what should happen, I’m asking you to be honest with yourself and ask, “What would you do in that situation?” Personally I’ve long fought a romanticized opinion of myself, and if all things are equal, in that position, I would be swayed to sway my client towards the end that would profit me more.
Now lets factor back in the morality so now your conscience also works against you as well. Now we just have to find the price it would take for you to shut your conscience up. Like in the videos, is it $50 per dead baby tissue, $75, maybe a $100? See how easily that small voice in your head and heart gets even smaller when the dollar signs start going up?
Let’s do some math.
Planned Parenthood boast that only 3% of its total services are actually abortions (you can read the Kevin DeYoung article mentioned above to see why those numbers shouldn’t be trusted), and for the sake of argument, lets accept them as fact. Planned Parenthood boast 11 million total services, of which more than 300,000 (327,653 to be exact) were abortions, roughly only 3%
So maybe you said, “Nope, I would never sell my conscience for the price of a baby, not $50, not $75, not even for a $100!” How about we take that low end price, $50, and multiply it by the number of abortions by planned parenthood in the last year?
$50 x 327,653 dead baby tissues = $16,382,650 potential income.
What about that number, is that enough for your conscience, 16 million a year?
The justification easily flows… “Well maybe I’m actually sparing that child from a hard life… maybe they’ll just become part of the system… there’s no guarantee that they will find a good family for them… they’ll just become a drain on society… in a way, I’m doing them and everyone a favor.”
With those numbers it becomes extremely easy to start justifying murder.
“These people shouldn’t even be having kids if they can’t take care of them!” Let’s follow that logic as well. In addition to telling all the children in the world that they are no different than a tumor, to be logically consistent in this view, you would also have to look at my two adopted daughters and tell them that it would of been better if their mom would of aborted them. No more Stella and no more Skylee, according to this worldview’s logic, they should not of been allowed to become human beings.
Don’t think to much about it, you’ll make yourself sad. Instead of dealing with the logical outcome of these lies, you can just believe them, and cover the hole in your conscience with some extra money.
Back to adoption and abortion, if there is no moral difference between the two, and there is no financial incentive towards one or the other, you would expect the number of adoption referrals to abortion, to be similar. Not necessarily equal, but close if both option are given fair treatment, but the numbers don’t reflect this either.
“In that same year Planned Parenthood listed only 31,098 “prenatal services” and a meager 841 “adoption referrals to other agencies.” Which means that if you walk into Planned Parenthood with an unborn baby you are 10 times more likely to get an abortion than prenatal screening and almost 400 times more likely to be offered an abortion than given an adoption referral.“
Surely, if all of these options have equal value and weight, then the numbers would reflect it. So what is tipping the scale? It must be that extra $16 mil. Now what if there was more incentive for Planed Parenthood agencies for adoption referrals, would the numbers even out?
Now, if you ever have read my blog before you’ll know I never scorn my opposition without also scorning my own team, so here is another set of numbers for you.
There are and estimated 40-50 million adoptable orphans in the world who are at risk of disease and death, and I know that is a lot, but they are ready, simply waiting for willing parents to cut through the red tape and save their lives. To this number, there is reportedly over 2 billion of the world’s total population that identify as Christian. Now identifying is one thing, but of that over 2 billion, 800 million claim that they have a definite relationship with Jesus Christ, meaning that their faith is not just part of their culture, but that it is important and real to them and their lives.
These Christians, who according to their bibles, were once useless, abandoned, helpless, unwanted and destitute as the orphans of the world, but they were adopted by God through his Son Christ and he has called them wanted. Think of that, the God of the universe wants you! Not because you are special, but because He is good!
So take the low number of Christians (800 Million), and tell them that true religion is taking care of widows in orphans (as it does in James 1:27), and tell them to tackle this problem and it would only take a mere 6 to 7% of the body of Christ to adopt a child, and there would no longer be any children available for adoption in need of a family. Christians could, and should, end orphans.
So my big question is this. Would the demand for abortion on demand, be in such demand, if more Christians were to say to those unwanted children that they are wanted, and through adoption, love them in the exact same way that they have been loved through Christ? How would that change the way that the world sees Christ and his church? How would the love of Jesus, through his followers, literally change the world?
Abortion is the sinful outcome of a lack of christian unwillingness to adopt.
It may not of caused it, but it sure as hell left the door wide open for it.
Theist the Bearded 