We live in a divided world, be it politically, religiously or interdenominationally—it seems as time goes on, consensus becomes ever more elusive. Think of the good that we could accomplish if as society, as a church and as a nation, we were permitted to respectfully “agree to disagree” where the impasse was too great; yet still work together on intractable issues in dire need of a solution.
One of the issues that continues to drive a wedge in our society, creating an even bigger chasm as a result, is the abortion debate. For many Christians, myself included, there is no middle ground here. Abortion is murder and it should not be allowed under any circumstances. For some people, the answers don’t come as easy. For others, abortion should be available on demand, no questions asked.
From the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh, and the mass hysteria surrounding the alleged impending repeal of Roe v. Wade, to the recent comments made by Virginia Gov. Northam and New York’s new abortion law, there are many factors that have brought this debate once again into the forefront.
Northam, in reference to children that have just been born, said: “If the infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother.”
This is a quote taken from a radio interview where the governor of Virginia, who is a physician, and according to his spokesperson, was hypothetically discussing “...the tragic and extremely rare case in which a woman with a nonviable pregnancy or severe fetal abnormalities went into labor.”
Despite the parsing of words, this describes nothing short of legal infanticide. And Northam is not an outlier. Just last month, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo signed a law legalizing abortion in his state up to 40 weeks, up until the moment of birth. So where does it end?
If you were to ask the authors of an article featured in the Journal of Medical Ethics entitled “After-birth abortion: why should the baby live?” they would suggest that Cuomo and Northam do not go far enough. Their abstract reads in relevant part:
“Abortion is largely accepted for reasons that do not have anything to do with the fetus’ health. By showing that (1) both fetuses and newborns do not have the same moral status as actual persons, (2) the fact that both are potential persons is morally irrelevant and (3) adoption is not always in the best interest of actual people, the authors argue that what we call ‘after-birth abortion’ (killing a newborn) should be permissible in all the cases where abortion is, including cases where the newborn is not disabled.”
Detractors will suggest this is a far too slippery slope, and inserted for mere shock value. But is it? In just a few decades our society has leapt from justifying abortion prior to the viability of the fetus to murdering newborns. The slope exists, and the skids are already greased.
So, what’s to be done? It would be a great disservice to this discussion to fail to take into account that there are young girls and women who find themselves pregnant and truly feel they have no options. So, instead of offering their children a death sentence, why not offer their children a chance to have a life?
At my church, Hagee Ministries, we aim to do just that through our latest initiative called the Sanctuary of Hope (SOH), which offers its residents access to medical care, parental training, counseling, educational opportunities and job placement assistance, among other services.
Our ministry knows that there are many who do not want to terminate their pregnancy, but simultaneously feel ill-equipped to raise a child.
Let’s let this be an issue upon which we can reach agreement: regardless of how you vote and regardless of how you pray, there are girls out there who are hurting and who need help. They feel deserted and hopeless. Let’s stop yelling about the issue and call it a day. Let’s deal with the issue by giving young pregnant women sanctuary and hope.