Featured Image
Abortionist Willie Parker.

March 6, 2019 (LifeSiteNews) – For years Willie Parker has been a prominent figure for his branding as a “Christian” abortionist who claims his practice is not only permitted but compelled by the Bible. He reiterated that claim during a recent debate with pro-life speaker Mike Adams, who challenged him for “hijack[ing]” the parable of the Good Samaritan.

Parker is an OB/GYN who commits abortions in Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi, and Pennsylvania, as well as a pro-abortion public speaker and author whose work has been recognized by both NARAL’s Champions of Choice award and Planned Parenthood’s Margaret Sanger Award. He believes that “no procedure should be banned or outlawed outright,” not even partial-birth abortion.

Last month, the University of North Carolina-Wilmington (UNCW) hosted a debate between Parker and Adams, a UNCW criminology professor and pro-life public speaker.

At one point during the debate, Parker invoked a passage from one of Dr. Martin Luther King’s sermons that discussed the Biblical parable of the Good Samaritan, Christian Headlines reports.

“Dr. King said that…what made the Good Samaritan good was his ability to reverse the question of concern,” Parker argued. “Instead of asking what will happen to me if I stop to help this person, he asked what will happen to this person if I don't stop to help him?” Parker has previously said that the sermon “challenged” him to a “deeper spiritual understanding.

In the Parable of the Good Samaritan, Jesus tells the story of a man robbed and left for dead by the road. The victim was passed and ignored by a priest and a Levite, but a Samaritan stopped to treat his wounds and bring him to an inn. “Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?” Jesus asked, the answer to which was “The one who had mercy on him.”

In King’s 1968 “I’ve Been to the Mountaintop” speech, the late civil rights leader’s takeaway from the parable is the importance of putting an action's consequences for others ahead of concern for one’s self.

“It’s possible that the priest and the Levite looked over that man on the ground and wondered if the robbers were still around. Or it’s possible that they felt that the man on the ground was merely faking,” King said. But while the priest and the Levites’ first question was “If I stop to help this man, what will happen to me?” the Good Samaritan “reversed the question” by asking, “If I do not stop to help this man, what will happen to him?’”

Parker appears to cast himself as the traveler in the parable and abortion-seeking patients as the man on the road, but ignores the needs of and compassion owed to the preborn child – a point on which Adams challenged him in rebuttal.

“I agree that the Good Samaritan is a good parable because I often ask the question: Who is my neighbor? And I'll answer that question for you right now. The unborn is my neighbor,” Adams responded.

“You will notice something about that parable – when someone was robbed and beaten and lying by the side of the road, you know what the Good Samaritan didn't do? The Good Samaritan didn't stop by the side of the road and slit his throat and slowly and methodically dismember him,” he continued. “I believe that the Good Samaritan parable is a pro-life parable, and I don't appreciate it being hijacked in the name of God. That is obscene.”

During the debate, Parker claimed that “fetuses are human beings, but they’re not people,” and therefore “if a fetus is not a person and a woman is a person, they may both have moral weight but that moral weight is not equal.”

As Parker doesn’t dispute, modern biology unambiguously establishes that preborn babies are living human beings from fertilization onward. The notion of humans and “persons” being two different things has no basis in medical science, but is a philosophical claim that isn’t supported by Christianity, either. The Bible repeatedly condemns “murder” and “shed[ding] innocent blood” as “detestable to” the Lord, because “in the image of God has God made mankind.”


Commenting Guidelines
LifeSiteNews welcomes thoughtful, respectful comments that add useful information or insights. Demeaning, hostile or propagandistic comments, and streams not related to the storyline, will be removed.

LSN commenting is not for frequent personal blogging, on-going debates or theological or other disputes between commenters.

Multiple comments from one person under a story are discouraged (suggested maximum of three). Capitalized sentences or comments will be removed (Internet shouting).

LifeSiteNews gives priority to pro-life, pro-family commenters and reserves the right to edit or remove comments.

Comments under LifeSiteNews stories do not necessarily represent the views of LifeSiteNews.