Sacrificing the Unborn on a Political Altar?
I confess to not having much interest in politics. The exception is those political issues which in fact are first biblical and moral issues. These particularly include concern for the poor and needy and defenseless. Hence I oppose abortion, disregard for the poor, and racism.
I have been a Republican largely because I oppose abortion. But my concern for the poor, racial justice, and the environment—all of which have a strong biblical basis—make me sometimes identify more with the concerns of some Democrats (though I don’t always agree with their proposed solutions). But I can’t be a Democrat as long as that party remains hostile toward the rights of unborn children. Yes, there are prolife Democrats, but they are a small minority. I salute their efforts.
If given a choice between voting for a prolife Democrat and a prochoice Republican, I’d vote for the Democrat in a heartbeat. No, child-protecting and child-killing aren’t the only issues, but I can never regard them as secondary; I might write in a third alternative, but I will never cast a vote for someone who won’t stand up for the right of unborn children to live, yes, even if I agree with them on every other issue. John Piper takes the same position; see his article One Issue Politics.
As director of a nonprofit organization, I can publicly advocate any position I choose on moral issues. (If the IRS said I could not do so, we would simply surrender our ministry’s tax exempt status, since the IRS is not our Lord.) The IRS also says the leader of a nonprofit organization can endorse a candidate as a private citizen, not as a representative of his organization. I have done that in my personal blog, which I write myself and talk about everything from family to books to personal beliefs, including who I favor as a presidential candidate.
In this newsletter, however, I do speak as EPM’s director and therefore am not endorsing a candidate. I will leave you to evaluate the candidates yourself or go elsewhere for further guidance. What I’m writing about is not a man, not a candidate, but a moral position and whether our loyalties properly belong to a political party.
When Pat Robertson publically endorsed Rudy Giuliani, standing by his side and presenting him as the best candidate for the presidency, I knew I had to speak up. I believe Robertson is absolutely wrong. I am truly saddened for him. I shake my head in wonder at what has happened to him and other Christians who once stood up for innocent lives and moral concerns, but who appear to now be followers of a political party.
Before we go further, none of this will make sense to you if you don’t understand why abortion is such a big deal. The picture above is a 3D sonogram of a child in the womb. Check out this website: tinyurl.com/ywcrzb for a beautiful slide show of living unborn children at various stages of development. This and the photos in this article are all of living children in the womb.
In contrast to these, go to www.abort73.com/HTML/I-A-4-video.html to see what an abortion really does to children. Warning: these are not made up photos; they are not exaggerated. They are real. This is simply what abortion is. Uncloaked, uncovered, unimaginably horrible. If these pictures, rather than banners and balloons, were hung alongside Rudy Giuliani and every candidate who defends legal abortion, we would turn away in horror at the evil of this position.
If, like many, you get upset about the fact that people would post these pictures or that I would give a link to them, I suggest you reserve your outrage for those who defend the right to commit such atrocities against children. It is not the photos that are immoral—it is abortion that is immoral. The photos only tell the truth most of us don’t want to see. It is the height of hypocrisy to support a candidate who defends legalized abortion, while getting mad at people who show the truth about abortion because the truth is so horrible.
Now, if you are “prochoice,” I’m nearly certain you won’t go to the slide show showing what an abortion is. My question is, “Why would it be hard for you to watch something that you defend as being okay?” If you are willing to stand up for the legal right to do something, shouldn’t you be willing to look at what that something really is? We hate the pictures because they tell the truth-that abortion is not merely a word on a page or in a debate; it is a horror inflicted upon children.
If you say you are prolife, but you are considering supporting Rudy Giuliani, or any candidate of any party who favors legalized abortion, I pray you will go to your computer and watch the video you might have passed on. Because if you really saw what abortion is and what it does to a child, I don’t think you would defend anyone’s right to it. If you refuse to look at what abortion is, you simply will not “get it.”
God’s Word says of the innocent, “Precious is their blood in his sight” (Psalm 72:14). He sees their blood, even if you and I turn away from it. (Having forced myself to watch that video, though I’ve seen many like it, I wept and cried out to God to bring deliverance and justice to His children.)
Even the secular world sees the hypocrisy of Christians getting behind Giuliani. CBS correspondent Bob Schieffer claims he has a helpful anonymous source he goes to in the evangelical community. Here’s what Schieffer said in his Face the Nation Commentary:
When Robertson announced he was supporting Rudy Giuliani, who is for so many of the things that Robertson has spent his life railing against—gay rights and abortion rights to name just two—I decided to go back to my high-level source with the obvious question: Why? There was a long pause.
Finally, my source said “God only knows.”
Really, what are secular people to think? All the years that Christians have said unborn babies were precious, their lives were sacred, marriage between a man and a woman was sacred, marriage vows were sacred and family was sacred….were they just kidding? Because now some of the same Christians are saying “we support for president a man who has demonstrated that none of those are sacred to him.”
So what is sacred now? Being conservative? Being a Republican? Please. I am a disciple of Jesus. I bend my knee to Him alone, not to a political party. (If you are a Democrat or a member of any other political party, the same principle applies and you should examine your loyalties.)
Pat Robertson’s endorsement of Rudy Giuliani, supposedly representing the beliefs of a number of evangelical Christians, is disturbing to me. How is it that followers of Jesus who stand for the cause of unborn children and family values are supposed to support a man who will not 1) defend the rights of the unborn, 2) define marriage as between a man and a woman; 3) keep his vows to his wife and 4) refrain from betraying and abandoning his own children?
Robertson promises Giuliani will lead the way against terrorism. But what would he do that most of the other Republican candidates, and perhaps some of the Democrats, wouldn’t do? And why is he unconcerned about the acts of terrorism committed against millions of unborn children across the country and in his own city? Why should we expect God to defend the cause of a nation that kills His children?
Giuliani said in his speech to the Values Voters Summit, “People of good conscience come to different conclusions about whether abortions should be legal in some circumstances.”
Actually, those of good conscience cannot believe that it’s okay to cut babies to pieces. Such a conscience by definition is not good. These people may be sincere, but they are deceived. A conscience that is deceived can be earnest and passionate, but it cannot be good. Giuliani’s statement is no different than saying, “People of good conscience come to different conclusions about whether it should be legal to kill toddlers and black people in some circumstances.”
I am not a fan of Hillary Clinton, and would not vote for her for some of the same reasons, and a few others. Central among them is her denial of basic human rights to unborn children. But let me respond to the people who are adamantly ABC (Anybody But Clinton).
There actually are worse things than Hillary being elected. In my opinion, having to stand before God to answer for compromising biblical convictions and acting as moral hypocrites by voting for an unprincipled man who will not defend the innocent and care for his own family is worse. God will not judge me in light of whether I’ve followed conservativism or promoted Republicanism, but as to whether I have honored my Lord Jesus.
Jesus said if we love Him, we will keep his commandments. These include His commandments about the sanctity of life. As Christians we need to ask ourselves, do we love Jesus more than we dislike Hillary Clinton? I would not vote for Hillary Clinton, but that doesn’t mean that I will vote for anyone who runs against her even if that person has denied one of the central planks of the official platform of his party. And far more importantly, the very law of God that forbids the killing of the innocent.
If a Republican who opposes the rights of the unborn were elected president, the Republican Party would no longer take seriously the prolife issue. Why should they if they know that prolifers consider it more important to vote Republican than to defend the rights of the innocent? If our loyalty is greater to the Republican Party than to the weak and needy, the least of Christ’s brothers, then we have made clear that we are people of a Party more than people of principle.
My daughter Angela, an emergency room nurse who is prolife to the core, sent me a note which I totally agree with: “I’m still going to believe that God is on his throne even if Hillary is elected.” If Giuliani and Clinton face each other in an election, there would be some policy and philosophy differences, but what would be their fundamental differences in morality and faith and personal integrity? A vote for the lesser of evils is still a vote for evil. And it sends the message loud and clear: “You have my vote even when you turn your back on the innocent.”
You have no control over who votes for Hillary Clinton. You do have control over who you vote for. You won’t be held accountable for someone else voting for a pro-abortion candidate. You will be held accountable if you vote for such a candidate. “But he was a Republican, Lord,” You may say at the judgment seat. “But I’m not a Republican,” Jesus may say. “I’m the original Independent.”
Sacrifice children on the altar of the Republican Party? I won’t do it. The children aren’t expendable. The Republican Party is. The logic that we’ll really save lives because fewer will die under Rudy than Hillary doesn’t cut it. No, I’ll vote for someone who won’t sacrifice children on the altar of expedience, pragmatism, partisanship, or economic philosophy. And I won’t consider it a wasted vote, because if the two options on a ballot so blatantly dishonor Christ and His values, then the real waste would be voting for one of them. (And saying by my vote that the unborn aren’t really human; who would vote for someone who says, “I don’t favor legislation granting teenagers the right to live; I’ll look the other way while people kill them”?)
To some, this kind of vote according to conscience and principle rather than for the lesser of evils, is naïve and impractical. But if we acted according to principle and conscience, if we stopped selling out because of our premature analysis of “electability,” if we did it God’s way instead of ours, maybe we would be coming over to His side rather than expecting Him to come over to ours. Maybe then we would receive God’s approval. That’s what will matter in the last day. And that’s what should most matter to us now.
I can live with not being a Republican. I cannot live with ceasing to stand up for the little ones, of whom God says, “Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves; defend the cause of the poor and needy” (Proverbs 31:8-9). Is it really too much to ask that a national leader oppose the legalized killing of children?
If the people of the community close their eyes when that man gives one of his children to Molech…I will set my face against that man and his family and will cut off from their people both him and all who follow him… (Leviticus 20:1-5)
Do this so that innocent blood will not be shed in your land, which the LORD your God is giving you as your inheritance, and so that you will not be guilty of bloodshed. (Deuteronomy 19:10)
He sent them to destroy Judah…Surely these things happened to Judah according to the Lord’s command, in order to remove them from his presence because of the sins of Manasseh and all he had done, including the shedding of innocent blood. For he filled Jerusalem with innocent blood, and the LORD was not willing to forgive. (2 Kings 24:2-4)
There are six things the LORD hates, seven that are detestable to him: haughty eyes, a lying tongue, hands that shed innocent blood… (Proverbs 6:16-19)
Therefore as surely as I live, declares the Sovereign LORD, I will give you over to bloodshed and it will pursue you. Since you did not hate bloodshed, bloodshed will pursue you. (Ezekiel 35:6)
Every Christian must take these teachings seriously. Is the candidate’s stand on the issue of shedding innocent blood important enough to disqualify him as a candidate? Yes. While a single issue can’t qualify a candidate, it can disqualify him. I don’t think someone is a good candidate just because they are prolife. But they cannot be a good candidate unless they are prolife.
A few final thoughts. First, regarding electability: Instead of waiting to see who’s likely going to win, why not actually influence the election by getting behind someone we think is the right person, so they might become electable?
Is there a time for pragmatism? Sure. As long as you can stay within the realm of righteous principles, then go ahead and weigh pragmatic considerations, as a matter of wisdom. But there is no wisdom in unrighteousness. If you are tempted toward a pragmatic action that violates Scripture and conscience, do not succumb to that temptation.
You must decide whether the killing of children pleases God or displeases Him. If you believe it displeases Him, only support those who will speak up for those children, and defend them from the shedding of innocent blood.
Truthfully, I think it’s a lot less complicated than we make it. One day we’ll look back and wonder why we thought we should make all the compromises we did.
“The LORD said, ‘What have you done? Listen! Your brother’s blood cries out to me from the ground.’” (Genesis 4:10)