Wednesday, March 26, 2014

Should Abortion be Illegal Simply because the Bible Says it is Wrong?

In the few days since this blog went public, we have begun to see a surprising amount of resistance, but not from the usual culprits. We expected to see the illiterate and barely coherent ramblings from the pro-abort crowd. We expected to see the usual fomenting, insulting and name calling that we have grown so accustomed to from those who see their pro-abort bumper sticker slogans torn to shreds.

We were somewhat surprised, however, to see that our most vocal opponents so far are others who profess to support the right to life position – the very right to life position that we are defending. Of course, we are taking a different – more rational – approach to that defense, but we should be allies nevertheless.

In particular, many in the right to life movement are objecting to the fact that we are presenting a secular argument for the right to life position which is not based on Biblical doctrine. They seem to believe that this entire argument should go something like this: The Bible says abortion is wrong, and therefore, we must make it illegal.

Thus, we have decided to take another stab at showing why our more rational approach is necessary, and why one cannot enforce every doctrine from the Bible in a secular society. As we will show, not everything that is wrong should be illegal.

Let me give you some examples:

The Bible is pretty clear that homosexuality is a sin. Should that be illegal? Note that I’m not talking about whether or not marriage should be redefined here. I am simply asking if we should round up practicing homosexuals and toss them in prison (just like in the movie V for Vendetta).

In the Bible, God states that we are to have no other gods before Him. Does that mean that we are to allow only one religion in this country? Should we establish an official state religion and send government agents after all those who do not acknowledge and worship the God of the Bible?

The Bible makes it clear that we are to tithe, and to keep the Sabbath. Should we make it a law that everyone do so? Perhaps we should institute a tithe withholding and send the funds to that organized state religion?

The Bible states that children are to honor their father and mother, but the next time you’re at Wal-Mart, do you want government agents to sweep in and toss your kid in juvenile detention if they do not?

Of course, the answer to each of these is a resounding, “No, we should not.” That is not in keeping with the origin or history of this country. How then is it OK to try to argue that we should base other laws on Biblical doctrine without an accompanying secular argument to support it?

We have mentioned this and given examples such as those above several times and thus far, no one – and I repeat, no one – has even attempted to address it. The reason is quite simple – they have no response. They have no coherent answer for this observation that we cannot take everything that God considers to be sin, and make it illegal.

Sin should not be made illegal simply because the Bible says that it is sin.

In fact, arguing that something should be illegal simply because it is wrong means that you are looking to government as the arbiter of good and evil rather than to God. (Did you get that point? It has profound implications for conservative Christians, or at least it should.)

Government has its place and God has given government some authority over mankind, but government is not the entity that enforces right and wrong and brings all people to account for their wrong-doing. That entity is God and only God. Some issues of right and wrong fall under government's jurisdiction and some do not. The way you tell the difference is through the principle of inalienable rights.

The laws of the Bible deal with the heart and morality. The concept of inalienable rights deals with outward behaviors and government's duty concerning them. And while our faith and the Bible should definitely inform our behavior and how we interact with government, we shouldn't look to government as our salvation by expecting government to do God's job in outlawing wrong behaviors. Rather than outlawing wrong behaviors, government should outlaw harmful behaviors - those that violate the inalienable rights of others.


  1. Who is actually arguing, "that this entire argument should go something like this: The Bible says abortion is wrong, and therefore, we must make it illegal."

    And when you say "more rational" are you saying that the word of God is irrational? Or are you saying that applying it to life is irrational?

    Unrelated to those questions… What do you think about the Bible's constant refrain of "establish justice"?

    Would it be rational for Christians to remove that from the Bible?

    FInally, have you ever studied Romans 13 and looked at the various commentaries made regarding the abrogation of authority on account of a failure to protect the innocent that have been penned by some of the most rational Christian's in history?

    1. "And when you say "more rational" are you saying that the word of God is irrational? Or are you saying that applying it to life is irrational?"

      Neither of those are correct. By "more rational" we mean a more logical approach than some in the pro-life camp. We base our secular argument on logic rather than emotion. The Bible is quite rational and supports using logic to make arguments.

  2. Did you know that you can make multiple types of arguments and choose to neither leave the Gospel out of your work or refrain from making more secular arguments within a consistent rational and realistic view of the world?

    For instance, the most up front evangelical movement against abortion in the world makes this type of argument:

    as well as they call people to repent of the sin of abortion and get off the path that leads to death.

    1. Yes, we are quite aware that one can make multiple arguments. We do that. We are quite prepared to make the argument that abortion is wrong from the Bible and to call people to repent of sin. We are simply arguing for more than JUST that approach. We're arguing that we do need a secular argument against abortion, and not JUST Biblically-based ones. We're not against using the Bible. We just don't think that should be ALL we do.

      Specifically, this post is about the fact that discussing the legality of abortion (as opposed to its morality) requires more than "the Bible says it's wrong."

  3. As a Libertarian I certainly don't want all Sins illegal. But I wish you hadn't started with

    "The Bible is pretty clear that homosexuality is a sin"

    Because I don't concede that.

    At any-rate plenty in the pro-Life community also want Homosexuality to be a Capital offense, like Stpehen Anderson.

    I'm against the Death Penalty all together.

  4. I don't know what your disagreement with the Bible's clear teaching on homosexuality or the death penalty has to do with abortion or whether the Bible should be the sole reason for making law. Please stay on topic.

    1. You included it in the Top. And I don't disagree with The Bible, I disagree with "Conservatives" that that's what The Bible teaches. Just I disagree with other Christians are numerous other Doctrines addressed in far more verses but that are considered far more normal for Christians to disagree on. Like The Rapture.

      I think arguing this from a Secular perspective is important because actual Evangelicals are a Minority. These people who are upset at you need to realize Secular Pro-Lifers are needed if you'll actually make any progress.

      Example, there is an Organization out there for Pro-Life LGBT individuals.

      Capital Punishment is brought into the Abortion debate a lot. I know all the usual Pro-Life defense against the accusation that it's inconsistent to be Anti-Abortion yet for the Death Penalty. But their not enough for Me, The Holy Spirit has led me be someone who does not allow room for that accusation to be levied against him.

    2. The way to understand how one can be against abortion and for the death penalty is to understand the difference between guilty and innocent. There can be no justification for purposely killing an innocent person. There can be justification for killing a person guilty of certain heinous crimes under some circumstances. Of course, whether or not there is justification for capital punishment is irrelevant to the arguments we are making here, which pertain only to the unborn, who are totally innocent of any wrongdoing.


Comments are moderated, and those which are particularly illiterate or off topic may not be published.

Comments which contain foul language will most likely be ignored or saved for future use as examples as to how irrational the opposition often is.

Intelligent and professional comments which contribute to the discussion at hand will be posted regardless of the point of view taken or whether or not we agree with the content.