Social Justice and Biblical Christianity Are Incompatible: Here’s Why, Part 4

Beware of “Pro-Life” Efforts that Aren’t Really Pro-Life

Any country that accepts abortion is not teaching its people to love but to use violence to get what they want.
—Mother Teresa—

Key point: An individual cannot be authentically pro-life without being anti-abortion—not only in terms of belief but also in terms of actions, including voting.

Last time we touched on a subject that I want to consider more thoroughly in this post. We didn’t state the issue this way, but we could have.

Certain evangelical leaders are seeking to steer conservative Christians away from voting for Republicans at the ballot box. They are doing this (1) by claiming the need to be apolitical, (2) by refusing to call out Democrats for their glaringly evil proposals and policies, and (3) by expanding the meaning of the term “pro-life” to include backing any and every humanitarian cause or effort.

As we saw in an earlier article, political neutrality is impossible for the committed believer. This does not mean we as Christians believe the answer to America’s ills lies in any political party or candidate, or that we see salvation as coming from anyone other than Christ, whose kingdom is, absolutely, not of this world.

Yet we cannot see what church leaders are doing and not call them out for being every bit as political as they are accusing conservatives of being, even if they don’t realize what they’re doing (only a remote possibility). The two major political parties in America are not morally equal, and to pretend they are effectively means giving the green light to supporting the Democrats and their anti-Christian policies. It’s just that simple.

Expanding the Meaning of the Term “Pro-Life”

In last week’s post, we heard Dr. Walter Strickland declare he essentially believes party platforms are worthless in helping believes decide which political candidates they will support. Dr. Strickland, by the way, is the Assistant Professor of Systematic and Contextual Theology and Associate Vice President for Diversity at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary in Wake Forest, North Carolina. He made his statements in a Kingdom Diversity Podcast released on February 27, 2017. Dr. Strickland elaborated by making a case that being pro-life isn’t just about opposing abortion.

Christians have to know that there’s not any party that’s the party of Christ. And so something that I use as an illustrative point on this is the issue of being pro-life. There’s been a lot of good work by evangelicals about pro-life as it relates particularly to the abortion issue. A lot of enthusiasm there—but pro-life doesn’t just stop at stopping abortion. It extends to life after a child is living and breathing and moving. And so we have to be concerned about issues that could lead to the death[s] of certain people. For example we have concerned about race relations in America because it’s a deadly issues we’ve seen over the last 20 months, 24 months. We have to be concerned about the issue of immigration because there is a lot of situations that [involve] deportation and having children who are left here without [the protection he or she needs]. That child can end up in a situation that’s dire and deadly. We have to be cognizant of foreign policy and how we are utilizing lethal force abroad with drones and what have you, because innocent lives are at stake—folks who are not in uniform, people who are civilians. And so we have to consider being pro-life very, very broadly—very broadly. And the thing is that one political party doesn’t have concern for all those issues. So what do you do? Well, yes, you might lean toward one party or the other, but we have to have a conversation admitting that one party doesn’t have all the answers to this question. And so we have to have that humility as we enter into the discussion not just talking about pro-life but other issues as well.

Here’s the big problem with Dr. Strickland’s assessment. Believers cannot allow themselves, even tacitly, to support the killing of the youngest and most helpless members of the human family, and then assume they can affirm life in a full and biblical sense in relation to any other humanitarian issue. It just isn’t possible.

Believers cannot allow themselves, even tacitly, to support the killing of the youngest and most helpless members of the human family, and then assume they can affirm life in a full and biblical sense in relation to any other humanitarian issue. It just isn’t possible.

Remember A. D. Robles from last week’s post! He passionately declared, “What are the chances that a party of people who get the easiest moral question anyone’s ever been asked in the history of humanity—Hey, should it be OK for you to kill an infant?—they get that wrong—what are the chances that they are getting right some of these more complex questions about what to do with refugees? The chances are about zero—about zero percent!”

Strickland clearly assumes the Democrats are right and the Republicans wrong on a wide range of humanitarian issues. Yet, as A. D. Robles has indicated, such issues can be quite complex. Moreover, President Trump is not without support from African-Americans on the issue of border control. Listen to Rev. Bill Owens, President of the Coalition for African-American Pastors.

Apparently Rev. Owens and Dr. Strickland have some differences on this issue, although certainly Owens is concerned about how families are treated at the border. Democrats actually have refused work with the president to resolve the situation. In addition, a great many myths and lies are out there about the process involved. It is not the inhumane scenario the mainstream media have described.

Strickland further implies that the Republicans are void of compassion on race relations, even implying that they do not care about one whit about blacks. Not every African-American agrees.

Often the most compassionate solutions in the long run are the hardest to accept or implement, because they may not feel compassionate at the outset. We cannot implement policies according to feelings only. We must use our heads, not just our hearts.

The Cost of Redefining the Term “Pro-Life”

I’d like to return to the issue of redefining the term “pro-life.” The truth is that making it mean everything effectively waters it down and robs it of its moral authority.

In an article titled “My Problem With Expanding Pro-life Definitions,” cultural observer and writer Ben Buera—who also is Catholic and very pro-life—says this.

Expanding the definition of “Pro-life” by new pro-life/whole-life movements reminds me of trying to expand the definition of marriage. I’ve heard it said that marriage should mean anything we want it to mean, which of course, makes it mean nothing. Taken to an extreme, if “Pro-life” should refer to almost any issue that relates to a human being alive, as opposed to dead, then it means too many things.

We see this in the efforts of evangelical leaders who seem all too eager to treat the Democrat and Republican parties as equal in terms of virtue and moral authority. We also see it in this piece titled A Letter to Our Conservative Parents, which I would encourage you to read. While the letter addresses many different aspects of a young adult’s perspective on politics and culture, we won’t be able to address all those elements here.¹ I do, however, want to hone in on what it means to be pro-life.

It’s no secret that members of younger generations from evangelical homes have grown weary of what they’ve seen as political activism with regard to ending abortion, accompanied by minimal attention given to feeding the hungry and helping the poor and disadvantaged in other ways. Of course, Jesus commanded believers to engage in these and other charitable efforts. This is every believer’s responsibility.

Before critiquing the letter on its push to reinterpret what pro-life means, let me suggest that members of younger generations need to keep two overarching realities in mind.

First, they need to remember that help can be given to the poor through a variety of means, some of which are silent and unassuming. Churches, Christian charities, and ministries already are helping the poor on an ongoing basis, and their work often is taken for granted. It shouldn’t be.

Second, young adults and teens must understand that a person’s inability to do everything to help the pro-life cause from a broad perspective doesn’t mean he or she shouldn’t do anything. Each one of us must do what he or she can, and many Christians rightly see opposing abortion as a linchpin issue. As A. D. Robles has indicated, if we don’t get the abortion issue right, how can we get anything else right?

Many Christians rightly see opposing abortion as a linchpin issue.

Now, to the letter itself. To keep our critique simple, we will assume that the writer of the letter is a male and will use male pronouns.

It seems to me that the writer of the letter looks at the needs of everyone and then embraces the idea that pro-life ought to mean meeting everyone’s needs, but then he overlooks the assault against life itself perpetrated by abortion. Whether the writer realizes it or not, this tactic is a ploy being used by leftists to bring people who are reluctant to vote for Democrats over to a leftist ideology. Democrats, after all, are typically viewed as the ones concerned about the poor and disadvantaged. But there are serious problems with this assumption—and this whole scenario. I’m going to present the truth as clearly, as directly, and as compassionately as I know how.

- First, the Democrats aren’t concerned about the poor. Nor are they compassionate. They are using the poor to get votes.
- Second, government is not compassionate, nor can it ever be. Government is a bureaucracy.
- Third, government’s job is not to meet people’s needs (see item #4 on this page).
- Fourth, help for the poor is to come voluntarily from individuals, as well as organizations formed voluntarily by individuals to give them real help (see pages 24-27 of this publication).
- Fifth, people who are concerned about the poor shouldn’t wait for government to take away their wealth and give it to those deemed to be in need. They should roll up their sleeves and become personally involved in helping them! They should give their money to credible organizations that really help those who lack or who otherwise are in need rather than waiting for government to redistribute money coercively. The government cannot give its own money away; instead it must take from those who have wealth and give it to others, even though it isn’t theirs to give. Even so, with this scenario the government is seen as the great benefactor. It becomes god in the eyes of those who receive “help.” Such practices foster an unhealthy dependance on the state, thus making it harder for the poor to break out of poverty. The historical evidence for this is quite strong.

If you care about the poor, don’t wait for the government to take your money in the name of “helping” them. Instead, give to charitable organizations who exist to help the poor! Roll up your sleeves and become involved in benevolent work. Volunteer!

- Sixth, understand this reality. Focusing on the needs of the poor and claiming to be pro-life while essentially ignoring the abortion issue makes a mockery of the term pro-life. No one, and I mean NO ONE, can really be pro-life and be pro-abortion, or even indifferent to abortion. Increasingly, Democrats are claiming to be pro-life and, at the same time, advocating full-term abortion, and even infanticide. This is ludicrous!

Focusing on the needs of the poor and claiming to be pro-life while essentially ignoring the abortion issue makes a mockery of the term pro-life.

- Seventh, with their redistribution proposals, the Democrats are advocating socialism. Do not be fooled by the emotional rhetoric. Socialism will bring a nation’s citizens—all of them—to poverty. The elite will live in luxury—until the nation dies. If you want to know what socialism will do to a country, look at Venezuela. This video was released by Prager University on August 28, 2017.

Here is one more video, this one released on April 30, 2019. In it, Venezuelans who’ve had enough and who take to the streets are mowed down by government vehicles! Viewer discretion is advised. Also, check out this informative video from John Stossel.

If You Really Are Concerned About the Poor…

So, as we have said, if you’re really concerned about the poor, get involved in helping them directly. Please, though, don’t just help them with financial resources and by interacting with them and teaching them skills. Oppose the Democrats’ push for “compassionate” government programs to alleviate needs. All of these efforts are consistent with the pro-life cause, the foundation of which is and must remain opposition to abortion and infanticide.

If you’re really concerned about the poor, get involved in helping them directly. What’s stopping you?

Beware of Those with Underlying, Sinister Motives

There’s something else, a reality of which all of us must be aware. Some people, including some evangelicals, aren’t interested in helping the poor or the most vulnerable members of the human family. Instead, they are obsessed with making America a socialist country. It’s quite apparent that they don’t really care about the poor. Instead, they hate the rich. Some sins are covert and hidden, but this one isn’t one such sin. Socialism violates both the Eighth and Tenth Commandments, these against stealing and coveting, respectively.

Some social justice warriors don’t really care about the poor. Instead, they hate the rich.

Further, beware of those who are all too wiling to use the pro-life theme to achieve anti-pro-life political ends. Some leaders are naïve, but others know all too well what they are doing. Thabiti Anyabwile, whom we introduced in a previous post, appears to be one such evangelical leader. A June 29, 2018 article titled “Evangelical Pastor Prefers Murdered Infants Over Trump” highlights a Washington Post editorial written by Anyabwile in which he declares that, after Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy’s then-upcoming resignation, he would oppose President Trump’s nomination for a replacement because of Trump’s racism, even though the assumption was that the nominee would consistently be pro-life. Anyabwile

is upset that America has not reached a solution for so-called “dreamers.” Trump offered an amnesty compromise for 1.8 million “dreamers” in January, which Anyabwile conveniently failed to mention. He also disapproves with Trump’s travel ban from predominantly-Muslim countries, which the pastor calls “at odds with Christian views of religious freedom.” Anyabwile also feels that the Trump administration’s enforcement of drug laws – which is not significantly different from the way Democrat President William J. Clinton handled drug offenders – is too harsh, and disproportionately affect minorities.

Tim Dukeman, an ardent pro-lifer and at the time a seminary student at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Kentucky, said of the pastor, “It takes a crazy person to say ‘I disagree with the travel ban and dreamer policy and those issues are significantly similar to the 63 million humans slaughtered by Democrats.’ That needs to be said.” Dukeman went on to add that because of the glaring inconsistencies between Anyabwile’s words and actions, it’s clear that he isn’t really pro-life, but willing to play politics, even in his position as an evangelical leader.

Takeaways

The bottom line? Actually, there are four.

Resolve to be authentically pro-life, recognizing that opposition to abortion and infanticide are foundational positions every believer must take. Work diligently in whatever spheres God has given you to uphold the right to life for the most innocent and vulnerable members of the human family. Support pro-life policies and pro-life candidates for public office.

Become involved to the extent that you are able in helping and assisting the hurting, the poor, prisoners and their families, and the otherwise disadvantaged. This also means helping women facing unwanted pregnancies carry their babies to term and helping them care for their children after they’re born, in cases where the mothers choose to keep their children rather than releasing them for adoption. Pregnancy care ministry isn’t just about opposing abortion, but helping mothers in need.

Also, don’t be fooled. Instead, be wise and discerning regarding the emotional rhetoric that runs rampant around through and around these important issues. Government is not, nor can it ever be, compassionate. Openly oppose socialist policies. Socialism will destroy a country and its people.

Finally, do not support the Democrat Party or any Democrat candidate. A believer doesn’t have to be a Republican, but because of the reasons I’ve cited here, supporting Democrats is clearly wrong, and even sinful.

Why must we do these things? Justice—authentic justice²—is at stake.

¹A gentleman by the name of Bruce Wachter responded to A Letter to our Conservative Parents with a letter of his own. His response is available here.

²See item #3 on this page.

top image: Photo by Nick Fewings on Unsplash

Share this article on Facebook or Twitter.