November 13, 2020 (Love Will End Abortion) — Jim Gaffigan is a famous comedian who became the poster boy for Trump Derangement Syndrome back in August when he launched a flurry of profanity-laden tweets against President Donald Trump, defending pro-abortion former vice president Joe Biden in the process.
Jim’s wife Jeannie Gaffigan publicly followed-up with an article in October explaining that what set her husband off “was that speakers at the R.N.C. repeatedly called Joe Biden’s faith into question and accused him of being something that sounded very much like a ‘fake Catholic.’”
In the same article, Jeannie used false, tired arguments in an attempt to justify how Catholics can vote for pro-abortion Presidential candidate Joe Biden, concluding that it is “crystal clear” to her that “the right thing to do is vote for Joe Biden.”
Jeannie then further promoted the propaganda by participating with the Biden Campaign in their outlandish “Catholics for Biden” push, following that she published another article immediately prior to the election on how her Catholic faith and motherhood informed her vote for Biden.
Sadly, for some confused Catholics, the high-profile Gaffigan Family’s support for pro-abortion Biden and the arguments put forth to rationalize it, may have led others into this same error.
It is truly a malformed conscience, not one that is properly formed, that subscribes to belief in the distorted consistent life ethic, a.k.a. seamless garment, and all the errors that flow from it.
Clearly, Jeannie is not alone in promoting these errors. She is simply echoing what has been put forth for many years by false prophets like dissident nun Sister Joan Chittister, Sister Simone Campbell (also part of the “Catholics for Biden” team), and Fr. James Martin.
Faithful Catholics are increasingly seeing through the propaganda and rejecting the false, tired arguments that seek to give moral cover for voting for pro-abortion candidates. Yet, at the same time, these lies are still prevalent, doing great damage, and causing grave division within the Church.
Here are the top ten important points to remember when you encounter this nonsense:
1. Proper Perspective
After nearly 48 years of “legal” abortion in the U.S., and over 61 million children directly, intentionally killed by abortion, we are all desensitized to the reality of abortion in our nation to some degree.
Belief in the disordered consistent life ethic/seamless garment occurs when proper perspective is lost in terms of the actual nature of what it is we are talking about.
The teaching of the Catholic Church is extremely clear:
“Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception. From the first moment of his existence, a human being must be recognized as having the rights of a person – among which is the inviolable right of every innocent being to life.” –Catechism of the Catholic Church 2270
“The moral gravity of procured abortion is apparent in all its truth if we recognize that we are dealing with murder and, in particular, when we consider the specific elements involved. The one eliminated is a human being at the very beginning of life. No one more absolutely innocent could be imagined.” –St. John Paul II, Evangelium Vitae, 58
If it were “legal” to murder any other class of people, and they were being murdered by the thousands every day in our nation, would we ever even consider voting for candidates that were seeking to protect and advance it?
The reality is that about 3,000 children are murdered by abortion every day in the U.S. In terms of loss of life, we have a 9/11 every day in our nation that widely goes ignored.
2. Be Fortified in the Truth
In responding to the reality of abortion, what is our human responsibility and Christian calling?
Jesus admonishes us in the Parable of the Good Samaritan to not ignore our neighbors in need, but instead to see them with compassion and to mercifully serve them (Luke 10:29-37).
In the Judgment of the Nations, Jesus identifies Himself with “the least of these” and mercifully warns us that whatever we do or do not do for them, we do or do not do for Him, and our eternal judgment depends on it (Matthew 25:31–46).
Do we really lovingly see Jesus in every preborn child that is being murdered in our nation today? Do we really lovingly see Jesus in every pregnant mom in need that is being deeply wounded and gravely exploited by the lie of abortion in our nation today?
If not, we must strive to do so.
And if so, we ought to pray and work with maximum determination to end abortion as soon as possible, making it illegal in law, unthinkable in culture, and ministering to as many as possible who are being affected along the way.
If we are fortified in this truth, it is quite easy to see and dismantle the errors that run contrary to it.
For example, one popular error states that instead of focusing on ending abortion, we ought to direct ourselves toward the more realistic goal of reducing it. Years ago, when keeping abortion “rare” was still in the Democrat Platform, this was one of their main arguments. Now “rare” is long gone from the Democrat Platform, but the tired lie still gets sallied about.
In this case, and in many others, it helps to apply the human rights atrocity of slavery in the U.S. to the same logic. When slavery was once “legal,” and baked into American culture, would it be right for someone to tell the abolitionists that they ought not focus on ending slavery, but only on reducing it? Of course not. The abolitionists rightly worked to end the atrocity and to help as many as possible along the way, and so must we.
The least we can do is to not vote for political candidates that are pushing to advance the atrocity.
Another example is the tired, popular lie that pro-life people are just one-issue voters who do not care about people after they are born. This even sometimes includes the added ridiculous charge that pro-life people are committing idolatry by worshipping the idea of ending abortion.
It is quite easy to explain that as disciples of Christ we strive to love all people and that there is one specific segment of our nation that is being dehumanized and murdered by the thousands every day. Truly, those who claim to love all, but vote for pro-abortion candidates, are not in fact loving their neighbors in the womb.
We can also easily explain that to pray and work for the end of abortion is to love not only the child in the womb, but to also love that child all throughout his or her life outside of the womb. If one is not protected inside the womb, one will never even have the opportunity to have a life outside of the womb.
Not only this, but just look at what pro-life people have done in every local community to provide resources for pregnant moms in need: from pregnancy help centers, to maternity homes, to local initiatives that provide baby registries, baby showers, and walk with moms and families in genuine friendship long after the child is born.
3. See the Straw Man
The argument for Catholics voting for pro-abortion candidates is so incredibly weak that the only way they can try to defend their position is to misrepresent the pro-life position.
This often hinges on the false accusation of claiming that pro-life people do not care about any other issues besides abortion. It is a version of the aforementioned false argument of claiming pro-life people do not care about people outside of the womb.
The actual Catholic position, which is the pro-life position, is that all issues matter, and at the same time there is a real difference among the issues in terms of magnitude and priority.
Once again, the teaching of the Catholic Church is quite clear on this:
“The inviolability of the person which is a reflection of the absolute inviolability of God, fínds its primary and fundamental expression in the inviolability of human life. Above all, the common outcry, which is justly made on behalf of human rights — for example, the right to health, to home, to work, to family, to culture — is false and illusory if the right to life, the most basic and fundamental right and the condition for all other personal rights, is not defended with maximum determination.” –St. John Paul II, Christifideles Laici, 38.
“Indeed, the failure to protect and defend life in its most vulnerable stages renders suspect any claims to the ‘rightness’ of positions in other matters affecting the poorest and least powerful of the human community. If we understand the human person as the ‘temple of the Holy Spirit’ — the living house of God — then these latter issues fall logically into place as the crossbeams and walls of that house. All direct attacks on innocent human life, such as abortion and euthanasia, strike at the house’s foundation. These directly and immediately violate the human person’s most fundamental right — the right to life. Neglect of these issues is the equivalent of building our house on sand. Such attacks cannot help but lull the social conscience in ways ultimately destructive of other human rights. As Pope John Paul II reminds us, the command never to kill establishes a minimum which we must respect and from which we must start out ‘in order to say ‘yes’ over and over again, a ‘yes’ which will gradually embrace the entire horizon of the good’ (Evangelium Vitae, 75).” –U.S. Catholic Bishops, Living the Gospel of Life, 22.
Rather than deal with the logic of the authentic Catholic position, those grasping at false moral cover to vote for pro-abortion candidates choose to distort the Catholic position on the preeminence of abortion and euthanasia and water it down to minimize the reality of abortion.
We simply need to call out the straw man for what it is and point them back to the teachings of the Catholic Church.
Perhaps the words of St. Teresa of Calcutta who spoke the following in front of President Bill Clinton and First Lady Hillary Clinton at the 1994 National Prayer Breakfast may be helpful along these lines:
“Any country that accepts abortion is not teaching its people to love, but to use any violence to get what they want. This is why the greatest destroyer of love and peace is abortion.”
4. Notice the Projection
Oftentimes, those who promote voting for pro-abortion candidates will accuse you of the exact things they are doing. One very clear case in point is their accusation that you are being partisan and ideological.
For example, Jeannie Gaffigan does this in her most recent article, calling for Catholics to “truly and honestly separate ideology (a worldview that is based upon supporting a political party or candidate) from faith in the gospel of Jesus Christ,” and then she demonstrates her own attachment to Democrat talking points and ideology throughout the rest of the article with statements like:
- “I had a vision of raising children who were proud to be Catholic and proud to be American. Sadly, that vision has become blurrier. But I have hope. I believe that this is the right time for Joe Biden.”
- “…I believe Biden’s platform does a better job of addressing every other social issue I’ve mentioned.”
- “The Trump administration’s inability to come up with a well-coordinated response to COVID has contributed to the deaths of almost 250,000 Americans. This number is growing with no end in sight. The administration made it clear that they are not going to take an active role in stopping it.”
- “Donald Trump is clearly not bothered by systemic racism.”
- “…the president is traveling around the country holding huge, in-person ‘super spreader’ rallies in order to drum up support from his base.”
- “Donald Trump’s refusal to address climate change is making the Earth less inhabitable.”
Jeannie does not seem to realize that her opinion on these matters, is just that – her opinion, which does follow a certain partisan ideology. Good people can and ought to debate these matters, but what is not up for debate is the objective fact that thousands of children are being murdered every day in our nation.
To vote for a pro-abortion candidate is to vote for abortion. You can play the game of saying that you are voting for that candidate for “other reasons,” but understand that even if those reasons were objective facts, which they are not, they still would not be anywhere near proportional to the reality of abortion in our nation.
5. Catch This Red Herring
Normally, it is best not to get distracted by a red herring argument that takes the focus away from the matter at hand; however, sometimes the red herring is so absurd, it deserves to be quickly caught and removed from the discussion.
Those promoting the idea that faithful Catholics can vote for pro-abortion candidates, will sometimes raise the odd idea that somehow pro-abortion candidates who are in favor of taxpayer funded abortion on demand will somehow do the most to limit the number of abortions due to funding social programs.
When you encounter this, simply ask them for the evidence they have that demonstrates their claim and then watch them squirm as no such evidence exists.
In one variation of this, the proponent may claim that the abortion rate goes down more when a Democrat president is in office and therefore Democrat policies are lowering the abortion rate. Dr. Michael New has put the research in and his work makes clear that there has been a durable, long-term decline in the U.S. abortion rate that has persisted through every presidential administration since 1980 and that there is a significant body of academic research which shows that it is actually a range of pro-life laws that has reduced the abortion rate.
Further, Presidential candidate Joe Biden committed to abolish the Hyde Amendment, which routinely saves more than 60,000 lives in the United States every year and since 1976 has stopped 2.4 million abortions.
6. Distinguish Between the Person and the Propaganda
In any discussion on these matters, it is wise to be mindful of both the head and the heart of the person or persons you are engaging. Stick to dismantling the argument, exposing the error, and understand that there are very likely other deeper experiences, wounds, and realities at play.
It ought to go without saying that we must always avoid issuing any personal, ad hominem attacks, yet it does deserve to be mentioned as passions can run high on such important matters. We are wise to commit in advance to rejecting any temptations to degrade the person we are engaging in any way.
At the same time, in authentic love, for the good of the person or persons in grave error that we are engaging, a certain level of firmness in sharing the truth is often warranted.
It is prudent to begin gently, but if such persons become obstinate in their rejection, it is wise to avoid any temptation to be overly “nice” in correcting the error firmly. It would be unkind to misrepresent the seriousness of such an important matter by being too casual and maintaining a false tone. An appropriate, temperate firmness is the right manner to strike in such instances.
7. Understand Mortal Sin
Those who vote for pro-abortion candidates and publicly promote the idea of doing so seem to take issue with the teachings of the Catholic Church, not only in this area, but in others as well.
They may reject other essential aspects of the Church’s teaching in regard to human sexuality (ex. contraception, homosexuality, masturbation, etc.), or some other aspect of the Church’s doctrine (ex. mortal sin, the existence of hell, women’s ordination, etc.).
Although we must not definitively judge their souls, we can judge the grave offense of the act itself when it comes to rejecting the essential teachings of the Church in matters of faith and morals. It is wise to be aware of the possibility and even likelihood of their free and knowing participation in such grave offense, which would be mortal sin.
As stated in the Catechism of the Catholic Church:
“Mortal sin is a radical possibility of human freedom, as is love itself. It results in the loss of charity and the privation of sanctifying grace, that is, of the state of grace. If it is not redeemed by repentance and God’s forgiveness, it causes exclusion from Christ’s kingdom and the eternal death of hell, for our freedom has the power to make choices for ever, with no turning back. However, although we can judge that an act is in itself a grave offense, we must entrust judgment of persons to the justice and mercy of God (CCC 1861).”
St. John Paul II points out the following in his Apostolic Exhortation, Reconciliatio et Paenitentia, 16: “as a personal act, sin has its first and most important consequences in the sinner himself: that is, in his relationship with God, who is the very foundation of human life; and also in his spirit, weakening his will and clouding his intellect.”
Further, let us recall the instruction of St. Ignatius of Loyola in the First Rule of his Rules for the Discernment of Spirits:
“In the persons who go from mortal sin to mortal sin, the enemy is commonly used to propose to them apparent pleasures, making them imagine sensual delights and pleasures in order to hold them more and make them grow in their vices and sins. In these persons the good spirit uses the opposite method, pricking them and biting their consciences through the process of reason.”
In other words, when one is in a state of mortal sin, they experience the enemy, the work of the satan and his evil minions, as consoling and pleasurable, while they experience the work of the Holy Spirit, and those in whom He is working for their good, as irritating and painful.
It is therefore helpful to understand that in those who advocate for voting for pro-abortion candidates, you will very often be dealing with people who are in persistent mortal sin already, and as such are afflicted with severely darkened intellects, regardless of how “smart” they may consider themselves to be. It is also helpful to understand that they will very likely not experience your correction of their error, regardless of how gently you approach it, with much of a welcome.
This is where we want to be especially alert in tending to the deeper issues of the person, distinct from the work of rationally dismantling the propaganda.
Sincere prayer and fasting for their conversion is in order.
8. Like Sheep Without a Shepherd
Sadly, the reason these errors persist is because the U.S. Bishops as a body are themselves divided along these lines.
In a November 2019 meeting of the U.S. Catholic Bishops, there were some bishops wrongly arguing that abortion was not preeminent in terms of being first in magnitude and priority among various issues.
Bishop Robert W. McElroy of San Diego objected, “It is not Catholic teaching that abortion is the pre-eminent issue that we face as the world in Catholic social teaching. It is not.”
Other bishops spoke up for the preeminence of abortion, including Archbishop Charles J. Chaput who issued the following correction: “…I think it has been the very clearly articulated opinion of the bishops’ conference for many years that pro-life is still the pre-eminent issue. It doesn’t mean the others aren’t equal in dignity.”
Ultimately, a final vote of 143-69 occurred in which the text affirming abortion as preeminent was approved.
Bishop Joseph Strickland tweeted, “Thank God the USCCB voted to uphold the preeminence of the Sanctity of the life of the unborn. It is sad that 69 voted no.”
When the U.S. Bishops will not proclaim and apply this clear teaching of the Catholic Church with one voice, it far too easily allows the errors of the distorted consistent life ethic/seamless garment that falsely minimize the reality of abortion to be perpetuated.
Those promoting these errors often cite ambiguous, misleading, or even false statements by various bishops. People who want to believe these grave errors simply surround themselves with priests who agree, and even enter so-called “Catholic” institutions where these errors are entrenched, like most colleges and universities that claim to offer a so-called “Jesuit education.”
St. Ignatius of Loyola and all the holy Jesuit saints of old, pray for us.
Again, it is not just on the error of the distorted consistent life ethic/seamless garment that this false, anti-church is built, but also on many other errors in regard to human sexuality and other aspects of the Church’s doctrine.
We live in a time where our bishops are deeply divided among themselves along these lines and therefore are not capable of faithfully echoing forth the Magisterial teachings of the Catholic Church with one voice.
This fact needs to be soberly acknowledged if there is to be any hope of a remedy. The Church is divided because the bishops are divided.
We are wise to reject the false teachings and inexcusable silence of the false prophets, even when they are wearing miters, and instead look and point to those who are proclaiming the truth of Jesus and His Catholic Church.
9. Point the Way
Those holding to the error of the distorted consistent life ethic/seamless garment will cherry pick Church documents in an attempt to make their case. The statements they cite are always taken out of the full context of the Catholic Faith, oftentimes even taken out of the immediate context in which the statements are found.
It is easy to find statements broadly speaking about the dignity of all human beings and how all issues affecting humanity ought to be important to us – because these statements are true and we absolutely agree with them!
But again, those in error, falsely claim we disagree with these statements when we do not and they then try to build that straw man pretending we are somehow dismissing the human dignity of certain people and the issues that affect them, when in fact, it is those who are pushing the distorted consistent life ethic that are dismissing the equal human dignity of the preborn and the preeminence of the daily, ongoing mass murder of abortion.
We can point to copious statements from various Church documents to put any such cherry picking in context. Beyond the several already previously mentioned, here are several more one can point to that can help alleviate confusion for any who are sincerely open and willing to see:
Catechism of the Catholic Church:
“The inalienable right to life of every innocent human individual is a constitutive element of a civil society and its legislation: ‘The inalienable rights of the person must be recognized and respected by civil society and the political authority. These human rights depend neither on single individuals nor on parents; nor do they represent a concession made by society and the state; they belong to human nature and are inherent in the person by virtue of the creative act from which the person took his origin. Among such fundamental rights one should mention in this regard every human being’s right to life and physical integrity from the moment of conception until death.’
‘The moment a positive law deprives a category of human beings of the protection which civil legislation ought to accord them, the state is denying the equality of all before the law. When the state does not place its power at the service of the rights of each citizen, and in particular of the more vulnerable, the very foundations of a state based on law are undermined…As a consequence of the respect and protection which must be ensured for the unborn child from the moment of conception, the law must provide appropriate penal sanctions for every deliberate violation of the child’s rights’ (2273).”
“Since it must be treated from conception as a person, the embryo must be defended in its integrity, cared for, and healed, as far as possible, like any other human being. (2274).”
Pastoral Plan For Pro-Life Activities: A Campaign In Support Of Life by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (2001):
“Among important issues involving the dignity of human life with which the Church is concerned, abortion necessarily plays a central role. Abortion, the direct killing of an innocent human being, is always gravely immoral (The Gospel of Life, no. 57); its victims are the most vulnerable and defenseless members of the human family. It is imperative that those who are called to serve the least among us give urgent attention and priority to this issue of justice.”
Pope Pius XI states the following in his Encyclical, Casti Connubii, no. 67:
“Those who hold the reins of government should not forget that it is the duty of public authority by appropriate laws and sanctions to defend the lives of the innocent, and this all the more so since those whose lives are endangered and assailed cannot defend themselves. Among whom we must mention in the first place infants hidden in the mother’s womb. And if the public magistrates not only do not defend them, but by their laws and ordinances betray them to death at the hands of doctors or of others, let them remember that God is the Judge and Avenger of innocent blood which cried from earth to Heaven.”
Bishop Thomas Olmsted presents it eloquently in his voting guide Catholics in the Public Square, no. 17:
“Are all political and social issues equal when it comes to choosing a political candidate? Absolutely not! The Catholic Church is actively engaged in a wide variety of important public policy issues including immigration, education, affordable housing, health, and welfare, to name just a few. On each of these issues we should do our best to be informed and to support those proposed solutions that seem most likely to be effective. However, when it comes to direct attacks on innocent human life, being right on all the other issues can never justify a wrong choice on this most serious matter.
As Pope John Paul II has written, ‘Above all, the common outcry, which is justly made on behalf of human rights — for example, the right to health, to home, to work, to family, to culture — is false and illusory if the right to life, the most basic and fundamental right and the condition for all other personal rights, is not defended with the maximum determination’ (Christifideles Laici, 38).”
Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration on Procured Abortion (1974), no. 11:
“The first right of the human person is his life. He has other goods and some are more precious, but this one is fundamental – the condition of all the others. Hence it must be protected above all others.”
And there are many, many more, but let us always remember that even though there is a treasury to truth from the teachings of the Catholic Church to help alleviate any confusion on this matter, it is also very much a simple matter of reason that even a young child can very naturally understand.
There is a right order to the problems we face as a people and as a nation. When thousands of children are being murdered every day and it is deemed “legal,” we must do all we can to bring an end to it, and doing so takes nothing away from the other real problems we face. On the contrary, helping people to recognize and defend the equal value of the most defenseless and most vulnerable, helps them to recognize and defend the equal value of every human person regardless of any other difference in characteristics.
10. Abortion is the Most Racist Act Imaginable
In the litany of “other issues” that pro-abortion voters list in an attempt to morally justify their vote for pro-abortion candidates, we often find: racism.
Those who claim to be concerned about racism while supporting pro-abortion politicians are either disingenuous or ignorant of the fact that abortion is literally murdering black and brown people in our communities, and disproportionally so, even advancing toward the point of the total elimination of black America!
Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood – the largest abortion provider in the U.S., was a racist, eugenicist who pushed for eliminating the so-called “unfit and inferior” to reduce the “undesirable population” and “improve the gene pool.”
In a 1939 Letter to Dr. C.J. Gamble, heir of the Procter and Gamble soap company fortune, and co-founder of the Human Betterment League of North Carolina which was tied to forced sterilization programs of predominantly black Americans who were surgically sterilized without consent (the program ended in 1977 and the NC State government apologized publicly in 2002), Sanger explained her “Negro Project” that served the same eugenic goal of Gamble’s to eliminate black Americans.
The letter suggests the following strategy:
1. Hire and train a full-time black doctor to earn the trust of black Americans so they can infiltrate both the black population and the medical establishment with their ideas and plan.
2. Do the same with black ministers to infiltrate black churches. In Sanger’s words: “The ministers work is also important and also he should be trained, perhaps by the Federation as to our ideals and the goal that we hope to reach. We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.”
Sanger was launching this “Negro Project” as part of her Birth Control Federation of America, which would later become Planned Parenthood.
With the “Negro Project,” Sanger pushed birth control and sterilization as a path for her eugenic goals. Alan Guttmacher would later do the same with abortion as the next President of Planned Parenthood after Sanger (Guttmacher was also VP of the American Eugenics Society). Planned Parenthood now kills more black lives every two weeks than the KKK lynched in a century.
There are many leaders in the black community who rightly call abortion what it is when it comes to black Americans: Black Genocide.
One such leader is Rev. Walter Hoye who explains that due to abortion, black America is below replacement levels at a 1.8% total fertility rate.
Another is Ryan Bomberger, who states, “It’s so frustrating to me that these college students don’t see the obvious. They learn terms in their minority studies classes like ‘systematic racism’, but there’s nothing more systematically racist than the government-funded destruction of black lives in the womb. And they don’t see the sheer hypocrisy of Black Lives Matter announcing its solidarity with the abortion movement.”
It is also a fact that “79% of Planned Parenthood’s surgical abortion facilities are located within walking distance of African American or Hispanic/Latino neighborhoods,” yet Planned Parenthood claims their massively disproportionate presence in these communities because they “want to help them.” As Dr. Alveda King, niece of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., explains, “Planned Parenthood moved into our community with the abortion killing centers and said, ‘We’re here to help you. Let’s kill your baby, so you can have a better life.’ Well, killing our babies doesn’t give us a better life.”
To those who understand the racist formation of Planned Parenthood and the reality of black America falling below replacement levels, it is the most reasonable conclusion that Planned Parenthood, and the powers that be who are guiding them, are in fact targeting these minority communities.
Racism is a very important reason to strongly oppose pro-abortion candidates, certainly not any sort of reason to vote for them. How can anything more racist even be imagined than the targeting and systematic elimination of black America?
In Conclusion — Let’s Choose to End It!
Pro-abortion people often do not like to be called “pro-abortion.” In their world of euphemisms that hide the hideous reality, “pro-abortion” is too close to the mark. They usually prefer to be called “pro-choice.”
It is always good to ask such people what “choice” they are in favor of. Let them name it: abortion. You can even take it a level deeper and ask them to define “abortion” if you want to help them more clearly face the reality they are supporting.
Another twist with the “Catholic” or “Christian” pro-abortion voting crowd is that such people will vigorously claim to be “pro-life” under a new definition of their choosing that somehow allows them to falsely feel good about voting for pro-abortion candidates. It is an even more deceptive language game than those who call themselves “pro-choice” when they really mean “pro-abortion.”
It is worth lovingly reminding such people that there is nothing “pro-life” about voting for candidates who are campaigning on a platform to push forward the ongoing, daily, government-sanctioned mass murder of the preborn. We can do our best to help inform them, but in the end, it is their choice what direction they will go.
But for all the deceptive rhetoric around “choice,” ultimately, the irony is that ending abortion truly does come down to choice.
Abortion continues in our backyard, on our watch, because there have not been to this point enough of us willing to exercise our right to choose to stand up and do what it takes to end it.
Some will say that we can never end it and so they live accordingly, believing abortion to be a part of life that we must accept, as if we are fated to always have it with us. We must call out this lie and firmly reject it.
When slavery was “legal,” normalized, and deeply baked into the very fabric of our nation, there were many Americans who believed the lie that it could never end and therefore lived according to that lie. Yet, the abolitionists of old did not listen to or follow those naysayers.
Instead, the abolitionists worked tirelessly to oppose the evil of slavery and they pushed on each day toward the end, until they finally did succeed in making slavery illegal in law and unthinkable in culture.
Certainly those opposing slavery would never vote for political candidates seeking to advance slavery. That would be absurd.
So what do we choose?
Will we choose to pray and work with maximum determination to end abortion as soon as possible?
Are we even willing to pray simply and plainly “for the end of abortion” in our local churches?
There is much work to be done, and one aspect of this work must include what ought to be the easiest task of all: never voting for pro-abortion candidates. In fact, we would be most wise to unite and use the power of our vote to end abortion in one election cycle.
The choice is ours.
Published with permission from Love Will End Abortion.