Would someone please rank these issues in the order of importance (include Biblical reasoning) so that I can know how to vote as a Christian and whom to vote for in November:
- War
- Abortion
- Environment
- Poverty
- Immigration
———————————————————————————-
And to really stir/mix things up, consider these questions:
- Is the modus operandi of the government, according to God, justice or mercy?
- Should I make war more important than abortion since at least unborn children go to heaven and most of the people who die in war are lost? Or should I consider that the unborn are more helpless than humans with guns? Or just compare the total body count and vote for saving the most lives?
- Can we find balance between totally ignoring and neglecting environmental issues and having to be totally Green in order to be a hip and true Christian?
- Do all the many verses about God’s concern for the poor have anything to do with what the government does, or should we limit it to what God’s people are expected to do?
- How do we legislate/enforce morality without expecting a theocracy? Where do we draw the line as to which of God’s commands we try to enact as legislation? And should we?
- Should illegal immigrants be treated like slaves in the underground railroad? Is it a comparable moral issue?
- What is a Christian tax rate or system, a Christian view of NAFTA, or a Biblical view of gun control?
- Is benevolence or evangelism something the church can subcontract out to the government?
The Blog Prophet 
Sheesh … I’m not sure I’d like to touch on any of those questions. Got any easier ones for me? Like, “Did Adam and Eve have bellybuttons?” Now THAT’S a good question!!!
🙂
PS – Still got the beard?
this time, I am not trying to be silly or just spark dialogue. I want answers. These are things that I think about.
yeps, still got the beard. I have trimmed it twice, but haven’t shaved since december.
I think sometimes we tend to vote with our wallet (which candidate will get us the most or save us the most), instead of which candidate is the one who will follow God’s laws closest.
I have just got through reading through 1 & 2 Kings. I found it realistic that if the King was good and followed God so did the nation, but if the kind was bad and rebelled, so did the nation.
I wonder what will become of this country if we elect an ungodly president.
Just goes to show you that the country/church/organization will always follow the leaders.
dude … I’ve submitted two comments … and they won’t show up. I may be getting spammed!
Fortunately we usually don’t have to make choices on all of these tricky issures. What should do is go to the polling place and vote for the candidate or issue that best reflects our personal values.
Each of us are individuals and come to our final world views based on our history, hopefully our personal Bible study, and what we have learned from what has happened in the past. I am a conservative but another who is just as devoted to Jesus is a liberal. I can’t understand how he could have reached that decision and neither can he understand how I reached mine.
There are some issues that both political liberals and conservatives should agree upon. Both should uphold biblical morality, should value life because God gives it, should care about the poor and disadvantaged. But even on these issues, the way to reach the desired goals is debatable.
Study, pray, and go vote your heart.
Royce Ogle
I’m going to put the environment and immigration at the bottom (in no particular order). I would say the other 3 are more directly life/death issues or things the Bible directly addresses.
You wanted opinions, I’ll throw mine out there. Most important issues to least important.
1. Abortion – I’ll address the optional kind. By that I mean the right for any woman without health concerns to choose an aborition (which many politicians favor). It’s always wrong. The innocent are always being killed. Every time, and it is 100% avoidable. This is the only issue you have listed that is 100% a moral issue everytime.
The next 2 issues are very debatable as to their morality.
2 or 3. War – sometimes necessary (if your country is attacked). I don’t believe it’s intrinsically wrong (see the OT). Also, John the Baptist (a prophet of God) did not tell soldiers to quit being soldiers. He told them to not extort money, falsely accuse or complain about their wages (Luke 3). Sometimes war actually can reduce loss of life. Hypothetically, if the Allies had removed Hitler from power before the Holocaust it could have prevented all that loss of life.
2 or 3. Poverty – Jesus prioritized his anointing as more important than taking care of the poor b/c 1) it was preparing Him for his burial and 2) He said, “the poor you will always have with you.” (Matthew 26). Also, some poverty is because of laziness, so that makes the issue even cloudier.
Since issue 1 is always immoral, and issues 2/3 are much more gray, I weigh #1 as the most important.
Obviously, there are many more things to consider, but this is my 5 minute answer.
Pingback: Christians and Politics » Mark Elrod’s Lame-O Weblog
I know that it’s not a popular viewpoint, but I’m moving more and more toward an apolitical stance. I can’t help but feel that we spend an awful lot of time and effort on our political system when it’s not even ours. We belong to a totally different kingdom. We’re strangers and aliens here.
Now I’ll duck and cover…
James,
thanks, that is kinda what I was looking for. how we understand the issue + how we understand our relation to govt = how we vote.
I am interested to hear others who believe differently.
royce,
thanks. just as in church unity, political unity depends on what each person thinks is essential and non-essential. the nuts and bolts question is–how do I vote?
Tim,
thanks, I lean that way but don’t want to totally give up. which is one reason I am curious and asking lots of questions.
Trey,
I agree that the principle is true, but obviously the OT Jewish kings were chosen by God to lead His people. All other kings are also chosen by God —-but to what purpose?
A few random thoughts while pondering some very significant questions posed by Brian.
Jesus sure seemed to spend a lot of time talking about and ministering to “the least of these”. Who are these people today? I have some ideas, but I won’t share them yet.
Looking for answers on war today in the OT is a quick way to miss the point of the OT. I am NOT implying that the OT is irrelevent. In fact, quite the contrary.
About eight years ago I was very near to being a self-proclaimed Christian anarchist. I even publicly stated that Christians ought not be involved in the political process. (I still respect and admire those that believe that b/c it is anything but an easy/lazy approach.) About three years ago something changed. Part of it was seeing my children grow up. Part of it was the writings of Jim Wallis.
Again, great questions, Brian.
Brian,
You asked us to rank the hot button issues. Here is my attempt and reasoning:
Poverty
Environment
Abortion
War / Immigration
My thinking is based on personal responsibility. “As far as it depends on you live at peace with everyone” Romans 12:18. I come in contact with others daily who have needs I can help. I can do my part to be responsible for the environment around me. I can, in the course of my contacts with others, emphasize the sanctity of life and the value of each individual. War and imigration are not things I can do much about. I believe the gov’t is charged with these areas primarily (unless you live in a rural are and deal with illegals). We are in a unique opportunity to have a say in this country. All of the topics you brought up are certainly issues that are key in many peoples minds.
Who to vote for is a personal decision. Do I think the lack of morality of one party or the other in a given area limits their ability to speak for me, yes. But that can be seen from both sides. I know many cynics who think all politicians are dishonest. I say vote for the candidate you think will do the best and leave it to God to work through whoever is elected.
James
What if we vote for the candidate who we think will do the best but once elected they do the worst? Are we to blame for giving that person our vote?
As a Christian and someone interested in the government, may I suggest a challenge to the premise? Must our denomination/interpretation of faith and religion form the foundation for our voting choices?
I believe the modus operandi of our government is creating a stable, safe, and fair environment for its citizens. I believe in a government which accomodates the inevitable plurality of its citizens.
I am a Christian, but I do not chain my government to my or anyone else’s interpreation of Scriputre, so long as my government continues to allow me to practice my beliefs. I also recognize that people who call themselves Christians can disagree on those issues – yes, all of them. So I don’t know it does us much good to prioritize them in accordance with some higher calling.
Jen,
thanks for commenting. I was hoping to hear a wider variety of views.
are you suggesting that we not necessarily allow our religious beliefs to influence how we vote? just clarifying.
and if so, what would guide our decision? From you comment, you would vote what you think will accomplish what you state in your second paragraph.
My political views are mine and not a product of the Blog Prophet’s website. I had to state that first before I state anything else.
Here we go…I am beginning to despise politics because everyone wants changes, talks of change, but America votes the same people in all the time. How boring!
I do agree we vote with our wallet, but we also vote the way our family has for the past century or how the union tells us to vote. We are silly people because we want to be different but we are still like everyone else.
I do vote values, and when my values conflict with each other, I do not vote. I cannot compromise my views for a silly election to which God will still take care of His people no matter who wins.
Elections are a matter of faith; yes it takes fatith to pull the level or press the button, but it takes faith to let God rule not matter who wins or how we have voted. God has plan and it may not be ours.
Yes I will vote, but I might have to vote for myself; even that may be a compromise.
Abortion, then war, then economy and poverty, then immigration, then a nap!
OK, I need more caffeine!
I am exactly saying we not necessarily base our political views on our interpretation of the religion we follow. We live in a plural society, and that society is definitely not becoming less plural. Therefore, we strike a balance where the government allows us to excercise our own freedoms (without striking Oliver Wendel Holmes’ nose) and we do not use the government as an avenue to infringe upon the freedoms of others – not just freedom of action, but freedom of thought and speech.
I am open to candidates talking about their personal faith experiences (though cynical and suspicious of their sincerity). Part of trusting a candidate with something as special as your vote is at least feeling like you know something about him personally, and I would be foolish to think your faith is not a central part of you.
As far as what should guide our decision, I’m a social contract kind of kid. In government, we come together for the good of all the governed, giving up some freedoms and protecting other essential ones in the process. I recognize that common good is an ever-changing, vague, and enigmatic thing, but, hey, what would we have to debate about if it weren’t?
A friend directed me to this discussion, I hope you don’t mine me joining in the fray….
Wow … those are some difficult questions. The way you’ve worded them, however, does lead one down the road to a theocracy of one sort or another. It means we are definitely looking for a leader with a faith in a Judeo-Christian God. Now, this has been our history to date, so that’s not necessarily a bad or wrong thing. I just needed to point it out.
One of the problems is that our president is but one leg of the three-legged stool which is our government. As the people, we tend to think (during elections) that the president has far more power than he really does. This is because s/he is the personification of our government. However, our founders split the powers between the three legs of the stool. So trying to discern who would be all the things which you are looking for, would likely do little to change things both within our government and in our culture at large. Does that make sense?
Given all of those things, I don’t look for what a politician believes at any given moment about specific issues, because those change. We are all human and we change our minds about things all the time. For instance, I’ve undergone several changes of heart about the issue of abortion and how we should deal with it over the course of my life. If I were a politician, I’d never get elected because of my lack of fealty to one stance. What I look for in a leader is a sense of that s/he has his or her followers best interests at heart. I have that sense for one or two of the current candidates, but not one of them. One of them is running for purely personal gain and will do anything to gain votes. I don’t care what that candidate’s stance is on an issue … whether it lines up Biblically or not … I won’t vote for them. They lack personal integrity. The other two may or may not have what I consider to be a Biblical stance on issues right now … or in the past … or they may come to one in the future … it doesn’t matter to me … but they have personal integrity, that is what matters.
I have been struggling with many of these same issues on my blog. Here’s a conclusion I’ve come to:
(Now, this isn’t “thus sayeth The Lord”, it’s just me.) In this day and age you cannot, and should not try to, legislate morality. Basic questions of right and wrong don’t apply anymore as so many people beleive “it’s all relative”.
For example: If we, as Christians, rush someone into office who will quickly overturn Roe v. Wade, without the American people understanding WHY, the results could be disasterous. (I know it’s not as simple as that, since there is division on the issue within the Christian community as well, it’s just an example.)
Don’t get me wrong, use your vote, use it wisely to make a difference in your country, state, county, town, and school, but the beauty, and travisty, of a democracy, is not everyone will agree with you.
What we need to do, as Christians, instead of using the legislative process to enforce morality is “go forth and make disciples” and thus make the the moral choice – the Biblical choice – the only choice. To continue my example with Roe v. Wade, if everyone starts on the same page – Genesis 1:1 – maybe we can all come to the same conclusions and then it doesn’t matter what is legislated, we’ll all be doing the right thing anyway.
It’s early in the morning and I’m kind of rambling. I hope that makes sense.
As to the specific questions you pose, I’m as lost as you are. I’ll be watching the discussion… thanks.
I will throw in a few ideas that might spur some more thoughts. I grew up in Sweden which was a society built on socialism. We had social medicine, schools, and taxes were at about 75% of your salary. This system seems pretty biblical in the sense that it causes the majority to sell what they have and give to the needy. In fact it is one of the only countries in the world where there are no people on the streets except by choice. Every Swedish citizen is promised food, water, phone, tv, internet, clothes, and a home. There are some that still choose poverty, but no one has to. Of course socialism is not too popular in our American society. I would rank the poor as one of my more important issues because of all the references in the gospel of Luke to taking care of the needy. Not just in the gospel of Luke, I should say in the people of Israel as well. Do you think Israel was more a democratic nation or socialistic?
Would someone please rank these issues in the order of importance (include Biblical reasoning) so that I can know how to vote as a Christian and whom to vote for in November:
* War — non -existent
* Abortion —very limited
* Environment—no need to pollute the earth
* Poverty #1
* Immigration— no need for invading other countries
Just think about it if we solved the problem of poverty, hunger, and sickness, which is mostly brought about by poverty. What problem could we not solve. I know it will never happen, but it could. I believe Jesus said as much when he said Give,Give Give.
thanks everyone for your comments. This has been a good discussion. a special thanks to Dr. Elrod who has sent most of the viewers to this discussion.
I actually enjoy the diversity of opinion. I have more questions about everyone’s comments but I may not ask them. but they have helped me to consider and debate in my own head some of this issues.
Abortion is wrong so that is #1 for me.
#2 I believe the church should do more for the poor rather than leaving it up to the government, but don’t know how to implement that beyond teaching what Jesus said about feeding, clothing, visiting Him by doing this for the poor.
#3 War This is a topic that cannot be determined by election since we have no idea when a conflict will arise. Although many want to see the present one end, how this is done must be determined by how we can safely get our men out of any area, not just rush in and believe it would be an easy task.
#4 I think the environmentalists are leaving God out of the equation in that He is still in control of all this universe. Scientists can’t even agree on which way the climate is going. And men have done many things that have proved to be wrong for this earth in the name of preserving it. We can individually try to improve on what we do, but I don’t think it can be legislated.
#5 I believe each person should decide for him/herself whether or not to vote, and who to vote for, but I agree that the choice of president is only one part of the equation. The legislative part is important, too, and we only have a choice in our own state. We have absolutely no choice in the judicial part at all, and this part sometimes makes laws rather than interpreting them.
#6 As far as illegal immigrants are concerned, no one forced them to come to this country like was done to slaves so I don’t think there is a good comparison here, but I may be prejudiced because there are so many illegals in my state, and little is being done about it. Instead of trying to overturn this country, they should do something in their own country to make a change.
Hi Brian … I’m a latecomer to the discussion … on purpose. I’m often a bit ambivalent about the whole political spectrum … especially this year … Nader is the most interesting person running for President…and that’s just because he’s a novelty. The others are just politics as usual as far as I’m concerned.
Here’s why I have a hard time numbering your list. It doesn’t matter what the candidates SAY. They (as is pointed out above) do not have the power to do it. GWB is against abortion but what real progress has been made? The appointment of a few conservative Supreme Court Justices is nice but it didn’t get the job done. And those against abortion do not often propose sane legislation to deal with the problems of a country where abortion is illegal. Yes, abortion as birth control is wrong. But will a Presidential election make a difference in this issue? No. A Presidential decision did not make it legal.
The only person i’ve heard seriously deal with poverty is someone who dropped out a long time ago. None of the candidates running at this point will do anything about poverty because impoverished people will not elect them nor keep them in office.
I’m sorry if that sounds a bit cynical. Politicians have something to prove … there can be no assumption that they are good people doing their best.
I think rational environmentalism has not had a fair hearing in Christian circles. It should. But that’s not a politician’s job.
A point made often is that the government has taken over the church’s care for the impoverished, and we’re glad they did. bad on us.
You raise a lot of issues…all of them worthy of discussion and action … but think back in your experience. There is a limited amount of response to these important issues … the most important issue is re-election.
I’m all for term limits. One term. At least you’re guaranteed that some bone headed idiot has a limited amount of time to do his damage. And cronyism finds a death knell.
I was referred by a post made by Adam at Igneous Quill.
I have found all the responses to your post thus far to be interesting and thought provoking.
I will list my response in order from greatest (a “1”) to least (a “5”) of importance to me as a Christian. Though I will not necessarily use biblical reasoning. I will not do so for two reasons. One, my church views more than just the Bible as scripture and thus more than just the bible shapes my Christian beliefs. Two, I do not rely on the Bible or other form of scriptures alone but also what my faith has taught me. And by that, I mean what I have learned in life on my journey as a Christian. The Bible, IMO, should only be seen as part of what shapes the beliefs of Christian. More importantly, my relationship with and understanding of God shapes my beliefs as a Christian. With that said, here we go…..
1. Poverty – I pick this as the number one issue because I see it as being one of the greatest, if not the greatest, moral issue facing us today. In my faith movement we have a scripture that says, “God, the Eternal Creator, weeps for the poor, displaced, mistreated, and diseased of the world because of their unnecessary suffering. Such conditions are not God’s will. Open your ears to hear the pleading of mothers and fathers in all nations who desperately seek a future of hope for their children. Do not turn away from them. For in their welfare resides your welfare. “. I think that “For in their welfare resides your welfare” should be the greatest understanding of this issue.
2. War – I do not believe that we are to follow an eye for an eye mentality. I believe the teachings of the love of Jesus Christ should be an example for us to rise above that. Often times war is started out of fear and/or retaliation. The religious right wants us to believe that we will be safer when war is used as a method for peace. I find that absurd and not congruent with the teachings of Jesus Christ at all. There will be no peace until we are willing to put down our weapons and extend hands of love and reconciliation to all. There will be no peace until we realize that we often hurt many innocent people just to get back at a few.
3. Environment – unfortunately, we have taken God out of the equation, not left him out. We have done so many things for good in the name of progress but the affect that we have had on our Earth is devastating. Another part of that scripture that I stated earlier also says, “The earth, lovingly created as an environment for life to flourish, shudders in distress because creation’s natural and living systems are becoming exhausted from carrying the burden of human greed and conflict. Humankind must awaken from its illusion of independence and unrestrained consumption without lasting consequences.”. It is time to wake up so that generations from now will have a place to call home. If we, as Christians, don’t do something now, this beautiful planet that God created for us will be harmed beyond repair. I pray it isn’t too late.
4. Immigration – This really is a mute issue for me. Simply because it irritates and saddens me to beyond beliefs the way immigrants are treated today in America. Did we somehow forget that most of our ancestors were immigrants once here as well and inhabited someone else’s land to form the US. Immigration does not concern me. How people respond to it does. We have seen the worse come out in people because of immigration. Our nation is currently seeing an ourpouring of racism that may be even scarier than it was when it was mainly against our African brothers and sisters. I say that because this racism is supported by many and is subtle in so many ways. Remember, this isn’t OUR land. This, and every other part of the world, is GOD’s land! All should be welcomed.
5. Abortion – I am personally against abortion but do not believe it is the goverments responsibility to get involved. Thus, I am pro-choice. ‘Nuff said!
samishpatrol — WOW you nailed it!
I may post a summary of what I learned from everyone’s comments.
what is most fascinating is not what we believe about the issues–marriage, war, poverty, abortion–but that we all differ in to what extent the govt should be involved.
any one of us takes two issues that we believe are important, yet for one we feel that involving and taking advantage of the govt is important, almost necessary, and for the other, we don’t think the govt should be involved at all.
just one think I have noticed about many of you and me about different issues. I am just as inconsistent as some of you. that is what bothers me.
“I am pro-choice. ‘Nuff said!”
Nuff said… You just placed almost 4000 innocent babies into the hands of a horrible death machine and that was just for today! You get to wake up in the morning and do it all over again, and again, and again… How can anyone rank poverty above the murder of innocent children?
I have several thoughts:
1. Abortion is a back-burner election year issue used by Republicans to get the conservative Christian vote. Preachers never mentioned this issue until poor women could get legal abortions. The wealthy have always been able to get their abortions very discreetly, very quietly, and very anonomously, regardless of the law. And they will in the future. The Religious Right want the luxury of calling abortion first degree murder but oppose sending the mother, doctors and nurses who perform them to prison. Hypocrisy? Most support the killing of some innocent life with their “exceptions.” Inconsistent?
In the past 28 years only one Congressman has submitted legislation that would effectively render Roe v Wade of no effect. He couldn’t even find a co-sponsor. Rest assured that Republicans don’t want this issue to go away. It has served them well. Have you noticed how quiet conservative voters are on the issue AFTER the elections? It is obvious that there is no real sincerity here and that the motives are more political than moral. The motive is to get Christians to feel guilty if they don’t vote Republican. Did you know that historically, abortion rates have decreased under Democratic presidents and increased under Republican presidents? (See Stassen study) The real issue is whether the RATES will be low or high. Only two candidates for president this year had a plan to decrease the number of unwanted pregnancies, Rudy Giuliani and Hillary Clinton, two candidates the Religious Right said they could never support. How ironic!
2. The historical method for determining the rightness or wrongness of a war was the “Just War Theory” put forth by Augustine and refined by Thomas Aquinas. Clearly, the war in Iraq does not meet criteria for a just war. However, the war in Afghanistan did meet the criteria after 9/11.
3. In Matt. 25 when the judgment scene is depicted, Jesus could have chosen a hundred different things that would cause one to be on the left hand. Instead, he chose the benevolence test. Evidently, more people will stump their toe on this spiritual test than any other.
4. Fundamentalist churches are preaching a religio-political message today that weakens the real mission of the church. (See the writings of ethicist David Gushee.) And there is no voice crying in the wilderness to expose the brand of Christianity being propagated today.
As it relates to the rank-ordering of the issues you listed, here is what I’ve observed:
Conservative Christians tend to be very strong against personal acts of deviation like drinking, smoking, cussing, stealing, druging, abortion, sexual sins, personal crimes, etc. These are their BIG sins. They tend to be very weak on sins against humanity like war, denial of human and civil rights, societal greed, discrimination, environmental pollution, poverty, immigration, employer exploitation of workers, etc.
For example, at the Christian college where I taught for 18 years, someone put an ethnic slur on the school marquee. Taken down but no reprimand. If someone had put up a four-letter cuss word, that student would have been tracked down, and probably expelled.
Brian,
I guess I must have misunderstood the question. I thought we were ranking the items “in the order of importance (include Biblical reasoning) so that I can know how to vote as a Christian and whom to vote for in November:”? According to this, abortion must be #1. The slaughter of the innocent is the downfall of any people. May God help us before its too late.
I believe it is a misleading notion on our part to rank which evil is worse. The question that needs to be asked by voters is which issue(s) will the next President have the opportunity to make an impact upon? As I understand it, abortion is not one of those issues but stopping an unjust war waged by the United States of America against the nation of Iraq is an issue.
Rex
hey, rex, thanks for commenting.
since I know you well enough, I was ask you a question that I have asked my self.
how do we know that A. the next prez won’t be able to positively affect the abortion industry; and B. that the next prez will be able to effectively get us out of the war.
and more questions, just because I only have questions and don’t see enough black and white. how do we know that God isn’t using our nation’s illegitimate involvement in an unjust war to accomplish His Will and purpose.
I think one misguided notion is that a war has to appear just in our eyes to be God’s working (self-defense, etc.)? I do not believe we are a holy nation, but we might be assyria/Babylon, and God might be using the ignorance, impure motives etc, of our govt to accomplish something we can’t see or understand.
as Christians, is telling the govt how and when to wage war equivalent to the govt telling the church how and when to forgive, exercise mercy??
hey guys, I am going to ask a follow-up question to clarify one of my original questions.
I will be open and say that abortion is a big issue for me (I realize that this confession makes some of you automatically assume that I am Republican, but I don’t consider myself one, Sadly, all reading these comments have probably jumped to conclusions about each other’s party affiliations and full beliefs based upon our beliefs on one or two issues. Shame on all of us). and ask this,
If the govt decided that homicide was no longer a crime, would we be upset. If one believes that abortion is taking the life of an innocent, helpless human, why isn’t that as important as taking care of and protecting the poor, helpless and oppressed who have been born?
which brings up another general issue:
how do we distinguish between what the govt allows and what they force and what they prohibit?
example: I am not concerned about the govt allowing same-sex marriage. God allows adults to sin, and if the govt allows the same, there will be consequences with God, if not with the govt.
But I consider abortion an issue of protecting the helpless, just as I am concerned about the poor.
another thought, (all of these will probably end up on a summary post next week-btw)
how much are we influence by parties and being forced to vote for one. each of us has to rationalize being for someone who also (usually) supports some issues that we don’t or is against things we are for.
How much of our rationales about what the govt should or should not be invoved in is affecting by these rationales.
(I promise to write more clearly when I post a summary next time.) sorry if these last posts are not coherent as they should be)
I don’t know that the next president will be able to change the direction on the war. But I am pretty certain that the president will make decisions concerning the war and since I believe that the war in Iraq is unjustified, I am going to vote for the person I think is the most probably of ending that war. As for abortion, which I am equally opposed to, it is unlikely that the next president will appoint any Supreme Court Justices. Further, until Roe v. Wade is overturned, there is no legislation that any president or congress can pass that ends abortion. Therefore, I don’t see any point in whether the person I vote for is pro-life or not since he/she will most likely not have any effect on the abortion issue.
As a side note, those Christians who label themselves as “pro-life” but support foreign policies that continue warfare and oppression are inconsistant. Biblically speaking, “life” is not simply a matter or breathing or not breathing. Life is the ability to live as God created life to be lived. Warfare, poverty, inadequate health care, etc…, all destroy the life that God created us to live. As long as we, myself included, continue to support the state and its elected officials who protect the power of this nation at the expense of the rest of this world, we are not truly about pro-life. That presents me with a quandry because I am just not too sure that any of our presidential candidates truly care about hope and justice for the world the way God does (and the way the people of God should).
Rex
i hear ya and your last sentence says a lot.
I would like to ask a question. Please don’t attack me violently, because I promise I struggle and internally debate this issue. I’m not taking a side, just asking a question.
Several of you have set forth the idea of, “Abortion is wrong – we can’t kill innocents. The end.” Where does this mandate come from? I know the places in the Bible used to suggest this idea (“Before you knew me in the womb,” the passage about hitting a pregnant woman and killing the Bible), etc. However, I’ve talked to lots of people with lots of different interpretations of all those scriptures.
Can we really be 100% sure abortion is the same to God as murder?
Jen,
I think you have a valid question and I am sorry that such a question cannot normally be addressed without all of the political issues.
Rex
Jen,
It is good to ask your question. Please know that many ask it, but you have the guts to voice it. It’s admirable to honestly question. The Bereans in Acts were honored for it.
Most of the controversy from both the pro-life and pro-choice camps surround the following passage:
Exodus 21:22-25
“If men who are fighting hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman’s husband demands and the court allows. But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise.”
3 questions to ask regarding this passage:
1) Is there a reason to think that the child born is dead?
2) Just reading the above, what would imply that the child has died?
3) Ancient Hebrew has a specific word (actually 2) for “miscarriage”, so why wouldn’t it have been used here?
An article specifically about this passage, which I picked up these question from, can be found here on a site called Stand To Reason. It seems to be a good apology of why many people believe the Bible condemns abortion.
Also, several early church fathers, like Turtullian, have addressed abortion specifically. But looking at just 1, I’d choose one from the Didache, which means “Teaching”. It was probably codified initially around the early 2nd century (~135 ACE), and holds this passage addressing abortion:
“The second commandment of the teaching: You shall not murder. You shall not commit adultery. You shall not seduce boys. You shall not commit fornication. You shall not steal. You shall not practice magic. You shall not use potions. You shall not procure [an] abortion, nor destroy a newborn child” (Didache 2:1–2 [A.D. 70]).
Anyway, I hope I’ve been an encouragement to you. You’ve asked a good question and it’s worthy of thought and investigation.
Grace and peace,
Craig
Brian, just wanted to let you know I’ve enjoyed all the discussion too. I’m not voicing any opinions because I’m in much the same camp as you, but I have always enjoyed listening to others’ opinions and working it out without having hostile discussions about it. I’ve never felt the need to tell others what I believe (politically) and convince them to think the same.
Jen,
I forgot to add something important to the blog-post within a blog-post above. Given that the baby in the first part is alive, it is reasonable that the “serious injury” incurred in the second part would include harm to the mother or baby, so that the rule of eye-for-eye, life-for-life would apply to both.
Grace and peace,
Craig
Has anyone noticed that we have this discussion during election cycles, and after the election there is virtual silence on the issue? Preachers stop preaching on the subject, no more letters to the editor, or much general conversation about it. Our candidates stated that they supported “a culture of life,” and so we went lockstep to the polls convinced that we were doing God’s will by voting for them. The elected ones who told us they were “pro-life” are not held accountable. If they do, they say, it might hurt the “party.” How many days, hours, minutes is the topic even discussed in Congress? Hardly at all! Has it not occurred to anyone in the 28 years that it has been a political issue that very little has been done, even though we have had a conservative court during all those years? The primary issue, again may I say, is RATES. Will unwanted pregnancies be high or will they be low? And isn’t it ironic that the very policies and procedures that would lower those rates are opposed by the Religious Right and conservatives in general? No other issue has “benefited” one political party for 28 years than this one. They do not wish it to go away, obviously.
May I make three more points?
1. Back in the 1970’s the U.S. sent close to $50 million a year to Third World health care clinics, which provided family planning, free contraception, and some abortion services. Because they did the latter, the aid was stopped in 1981, reinstated in 1993, and stopped again in 2001. When the clinics closed down and with no free contraception, the numbers of abortions went up dramatically because there were more unwanted pregnancies. Not one word of concern from the “pro-life” people for the increase in these poor countries! Guess abortion is only a U.S. issue as it relates to who gets elected to office.
2. Before and after Roe v Wade, there was what is called the “rape pill,” which induces a miscarriage. Yet, isn’t that life “innocent?” But this is not an issue and people do it and there is no remorse. Why? Because the religious (exception: Catholics) culture has stated that the rightness or wrongness of the abortion is determined by the “circumstances” of the pregnancy. You won’t hear the preachers address this issue.
3. Here is a biblical question I will ask in turn. Adam was not a “living soul” until he could breath independently on his own. Was this just a “special case?” Don’t infer anything about my own views by simply raising this question.
1. a) I think the fluctuation in the US stance made for tragic consequences. The oddity in the stats is that even greater abortion services were available while no (?) preventative contraception was. Why did that occur? How? Prevention is definitely cheaper, so how did this happen? (I guess I placing a lot of emphasis on economics here.)
b) I’m always frustrated by the tie between preventative contraception and abortion. This is clearly different than the tie between abortive “contraception” and abortion.
2. Yes, it is wrong, and should be more boldly and consistently stated! However, with virtually *every* sermon I’ve heard that references abortion in any substantive way, abortive contraception is also referenced in the same vein. I might also add “embryonic stem cell research” and “the killing of possibly dozens of babies via the in vitro fertilization process” usually gets thrown in here too.
On a side note, the Catholic position also condemns preventative contraception, which may be the impetus for frustration in #1b, since these 2 “methods” are lumped together. The basis of argument against preventative contraception is not taken from the same set of passages as those regarding the respect for human life.
3. Yes, absolutely. Adam is THE exceptional case. We see God specifically breathing life into the first man. We’re not shown this level of intimacy ever again. On top of this, my understanding, is that “breath”, “wind”, and “spirit” are the same word. So when Gen. 2:7 says God “breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being” we could easily interpret that as the “spirit of life”. Of course, the poetry of these statements is somewhat lost in that wording.
I’ve never heard the “rape pill” condemned from any pulpit or Bible class. I don’t think it ever will be. It has been around long before Roe v Wade and was/is legal. There was no condemnation then from fundamentalists and there is little to no condemnation now. The truth is, most people (including most Christians) think that is an acceptable exception. When pinned down on this question, claiming that their “abortive contraception” language covers that, is a cop out, I believe. I find it interesting that conservative types opt for an abortion for an unwanted pregnancy just as often as the pro-choice people, in my experience.
Among the three candidates for President right now, only the two Dems have advocated a plan to decrease the numbers of abortions, yet they get little to no support from conservatives.
RU-486 = “abortive contraception” = “rape pill”. That is as clear as anything I’ve seen. And the message is consistent from various “conservative” organizations:
Focus on the Family –
http://www.citizenlink.org/content/A000005288.cfm
http://www.citizenlink.org/FOSI/bioethics/A000004944.cfm
Click to access Life07RU486.pdf
Christian Research Institute –
http://www.equip.org/site/c.muI1LaMNJrE/b.2717865/k.B30F/DE194.htm
(though in this article it is buried in the first cross-reference)
http://www.equip.org/atf/cf/%7B9C4EE03A-F988-4091-84BD-F8E70A3B0215%7D/DA020.pdf (page 36 or search on “RU 486”)
Stand to Reason –
http://www.str.org/site/DocServer/2.2.12_AreYouAgainstECP_p1_v2_1.pdf?docID=1321
Well, that’s very sad. It should be.
RU 486 was created in 1980 and not available here in the US legally until 1996 after pro-life groups fought against FDA approval for 8 years. (http://www.crankyeditor.com/Portfolio/Feature%20Writing/Health/RU%20486.htm)
I do not think it’s a cop out to “condemn abortive contraception”. This language is clear and concise. It covers RU 486 and any other such drug induced abortion technique.
As for pinning down conservative groups specifically on the issue? I simply googled it. I found numerous articles or references within articles from “Focus on the Family”, “the Christian Research Institute”, “Stand to Reason”, and “Coral Ridge Ministries (Dr. D. James Kennedy)”.