Posted Dec 09, 2020 by Michael L. Brown

It is one thing to be a radical, feminist atheist marching down the streets of DC and proclaiming your “right” to abortion. It is another thing to be a “pro-choice pastor,” as Senate candidate Raphael Warnock claims to be, using the Bible to justify abortion. This is as morally compromised as it is theologically confused.

Yet Warnock is unashamed of his position, tweeting on December 8, “I am a pro-choice pastor.” Worse still, as of this writing, his tweet has more than 215,000 likes, representing almost half of the 500,000 followers of the Reverend Raphael Warnock Twitter account.

How can a reverend support abortion? How can a preacher of the gospel, whose sacred text is the Bible, support the killing of the unborn in the womb? And how can he do it without qualification, thereby including the “right” to kill the baby through the ninth month of pregnancy? What an absolute travesty.

But Warnock is not alone in his misguided zeal.

A pro-life colleague told me about an abortionist in our home city who tithed on her earnings (meaning, donated 10-percent of her abortion profits to her church). She believed she was doing God’s work.

This colleague also sent me pictures of Dr. George Tiller (the late-term abortionist who was murdered by a misguided pro-life zealot) baptizing the corpses of babies he had just aborted. He did this, I was told, to bring closure for the grieving parents.

Another colleague of mine met with a group of inner-city pastors some years ago, inviting them to join with him for a major pro-life prayer rally. One of the pastors said to him, “We just took up a collection in my church to help a young lady get an abortion.”

How can this be?

It’s one thing to “shout your abortion” as a God-mocker or an atheist or agnostic.

It’s another thing to claim to be a follower of Jesus and a lover of the Scriptures and to support abortion.

That’s why Rev. Warnock’s pro-choice tweet drew such scorn from pro-life leaders.

As Lila Rose tweeted, “This is grotesque. You don’t preach Christ or His gospel; you preach the shedding of the innocent blood of his children. How dare you use the name ‘pastor.’” (Sadly, although Lila Rose has about half of the Twitter followers that Warnock does, her tweet has only received about 2,500 likes.)

What, then, would the alleged “Christian” argument for the pro-choice position look like?

It would argue that the child in the womb is merely a fetus without fully human status.

It would argue that in many situations, abortion is the compassionate choice due to the mental or physical health of the mother or the financial condition of the family.

It would point to tragic cases like the incestuous rape of a 12-year-old girl, resulting in an unwanted (and totally traumatic) pregnancy, one that could scar this child for life. What gives anyone the right to force this child to carry the baby of her rapist? And who will care for the baby when it is born?

And it would point to other tragic cases of babies born with severe deformities and life-shortening conditions, conditions readily visible on the ultra-sounds. Surely it is better to terminate this life in the womb rather than bring the baby into the world for months of intense suffering and hundreds of thousands of dollars in medical bills, only to watch it die an agonizing and tortured death while still an infant.

Yes, there are Christian-sounding arguments that can be made for abortion, except they all break down on this point: The Bible makes clear that it is God who forms the child in the womb and God who gives life to the child in the womb. And, just as it would be wrong to kill a severely handicapped baby after birth, it is wrong to kill a severely handicapped baby before birth.

That’s why the early Christians not only rescued abandoned babies, at the risk of their own lives, but they also militantly opposed abortion.

In another article, I laid out the main scriptural texts from which we get our pro-life position.

But for the moment, I have a simple request for Reverend Warnock.

Talk to the women who had an abortion years ago and who still regret and agonize over the decisions they made.

Talk to the former Planned Parenthood workers who, with many tears, will describe the evil of their past profession.

Or better still, stand next to the remains of more than 60 million babies – the tiny limbs and eyes and feet and fingers and brains and hearts, with a disproportionate percentage of those remains being black – and say, “I’m a pro-choice pastor.” And do this in the sight of a holy God who loves life, who loves justice, and who cares “for the least of these.”

May the Lord grant you repentance, Reverend Warnock. Right now, there is blood on your hands.

Tags: 

Sign Up or Login to post comments.

Comments

user profile
yeshuais4me posted a comment · Dec 12, 2020
I found this to be truth By Jason L. Riley - WSJ July 10, 2018 7:01 pm ET As Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court nomination tees up another national debate about reproductive rights, is it too much to ask that abortion’s impact on the black population be part of the discussion? When the Supreme Court decided Roe v. Wade in 1973, polling showed that blacks were less likely than whites to support abortion. Sixties-era civil rights activists like Fannie Lou Hamer and Whitney Young had denounced the procedure as a form of genocide. Jesse Jackson called abortion “murder” and once told a black newspaper in Chicago that “we used to look for death from the man in the blue coat and now it comes in a white coat.” In the intervening decades, those views shifted. Mr. Jackson abandoned the pro-life ship to run for president in 1984, and leaders of black civil-rights organizations today are joined at the hip with abortion-rights proponents such as Planned Parenthood. A Pew Research Center survey taken last year found that 50% of Hispanics, 58% of whites and 62% of blacks now say abortion should be legal in all or most cases. Social scientists aren’t sure why black attitudes toward abortion have changed. One theory is that as more blacks migrated out of the conservative Deep South and settled in other regions of the country with more liberal views on reproductive rights, their attitudes changed accordingly. Another possibility is that people with higher incomes and more education tend to be pro-choice, and since the early 1970s the socioeconomic status of blacks has increased dramatically. What’s not in doubt is the outsize toll that abortion has taken on the black population post-Roe. In New York City, thousands more black babies are aborted than born alive each year, and the abortion rate among black mothers is more than three times higher than it is for white mothers. According to a city Health Department report released in May, between 2012 and 2016 black mothers terminated 136,426 pregnancies and gave birth to 118,127 babies. By contrast, births far surpassed abortions among whites, Asians and Hispanics. Nationally, black women terminate pregnancies at far higher rates than other women as well. In 2014, 36% of all abortions were performed on black women, who are just 13% of the female population. The little discussed flip side of “reproductive freedom” is that abortion deaths far exceed those via cancer, violent crime, heart disease, AIDS and accidents. Racism, poverty and lack of access to health care are the typical explanations for these disparities. But black women have much higher abortion rates even after you control for income. Moreover, other low-income ethnic minorities who experience discrimination, such as Hispanics, abort at rates much closer to white women than black women. The more plausible explanation may have to do with marriage. Unmarried women are more likely to experience an unintended pregnancy, and black women are less likely than their white, Asian and Hispanic counterparts to marry. It’s true that many of these would-be partners are sitting in prison, but it’s also true that this racial divide in marriage, which started in the 1960s and has grown ever since, predates the “mass incarceration” of black men that took off in the 1980s. Among civil-rights activists today, talk of black self-destructive behavior is unpopular and minimal. Writing in Commentary magazine last month, Jason Hill, a professor of philosophy at DePaul University, noted the hypocrisy of groups like Black Lives Matter, who “want white people to esteem black lives and value the humanity of black people when they themselves can’t condemn and express moral outrage at those who maim and kill black children in the course of gang warfare, senseless street violence, and drive-by shootings.” Mr. Hill added that the “moral hysteria raised by a few incidents of police brutality in the face of this larger national tragedy is reckless hyperbole” and “hides from the nation a deep malaise at work in the psyche of some in the black community: a form of self-hatred that manifests itself in a homicidal rage not fundamentally against white people, but against other black people.” When you combine the amount of black violent behavior directed at other blacks with the number of pregnancies terminated by black women, the rate at which blacks willingly end the lives of one another is chilling and far surpasses what goes on within other racial and ethnic groups. Racial disparities in abortion rates are no less disturbing than racial disparities in income, crime, poverty and school suspensions. Why are the people who want to lecture the rest of us about the value of black lives pretending otherwise?
user profile
gerald a posted a comment · Dec 11, 2020
Straw man from Swkh310 (who likely isn't a Christian).
user profile
Seidensticker posted a comment · Dec 11, 2020
You want to prevent abortions? You're sure not going about it the right way. You shouldn't be focused on overturning Roe. Look at the per capita abortion stats before Roe--they were higher than they are today. What you want to do is focus on *reducing demand*. Then you'd be working *with* pro-choice advocates. Why are there so many abortions? *There* is where you should focus!
user profile
Swkh310 posted a comment · Dec 09, 2020
The childish idea that every Christian must agree on every single issue is absurd.