A couple of weeks ago in a men's Bible
study I attend, the leader of the group that week shared about a line
he was not willing to cross. He said that a “line-in-the-sand”
political issue for him was whether a politician opposed abortion or
not and stated that he could not vote for one who did. I can respect
that, even though in the context of the passage we were discussing
that week (Esther 3), I felt it was rather a stretch to tie this
topic into the conversation. At one point in my life I would have
adamantly said the same thing. A politician's views on abortion
became the single issue on which I would cast my ballot for or
against him or her.
I no longer think that way. I no longer
believe that one can make a single issue THE deciding factor in
supporting or opposing a politician. The world is much too complex
for that and the political arena has too many factors involved to
make one issue the ultimate criteria. Am I being more godly or
ethical to support a politician who opposes abortion but pursues wars
which kill thousands of non-combatants? Is a politician more moral if
she or he opposes abortion but supports policies that deprive the
poor of support? Morality involves a wide range of issues and
concerns and cannot be reduced to a single topic. Judging a
politician simply by his or her views on abortion is simplistic and
naïve.
Interestingly, someone pointed out to
me that the Republican party, which has made a big point of their
opposition to abortion, has in fact done very little to act on that
plank in their platform. As evidence, this person pointed to the
period in the Bush era when the Republicans had clear control of
Congress and the White House and could have pushed through just about
any anti-abortion bill they wanted. In the end they did little,
despite their claims to be against abortion. The person who called
this to my attention suggested that the Republicans recognize that
having this plank in their platform works to their political
advantage by attracting the single-issue anti-abortion voters, but if
they were to actually achieve their goal, they would no longer have
the uncritical support of that group of voters. It is to their
political advantage to say there are opposed to abortion but to do
little to work against it.
Unfortunately I think that lately this
has been less the case, at least in many state legislatures. We see
an increasing number of bills that seek to limit access to abortion
as a means to eliminate it. We see waiting periods and forced
“counseling” sessions and even had the possibility of a woman
being forced to have a vaginal ultrasound. I think most of these
measures are ridiculous and coercive. They do not respect a woman's
individual rights, but treat her like an imbecile who is incapable of
making an informed, personal decision. For this reason I oppose such
measures.
Despite what the reader may think at
this point, I do not favor abortion. I think it should be eliminated,
but not by legal restriction. I think it should be eliminated by
providing an environment in which women have better choices. This may
include better adoption support, better support during pregnancy and
after delivery for all women but particularly for those who find
themselves in difficult circumstances, unable to adequately care for
this new baby. I support the use of contraceptives so that women (and
men with them) have more control over the timing of pregnancies. I
want to see a culture in which women are not threatened, coerced or
forced in any manner – psychologically, physically or otherwise –
into sexual activity. Let's do all we can to eliminate “unwanted”
pregnancies so that abortion becomes essentially a procedure used
only in rare cases. We need to affirm the value of life holistically,
including the lives of women.
I want to vote based on a broader
ethical platform, one that recognizes that the Kingdom of God
encompasses a wide range of issues and choices. For example, I'm not
going to automatically support a politician who opposes abortion but
promotes the exploitation of our environment. I'm not going to
support a pair of candidates who oppose abortion but push for a
budgetary policy that guts support to society's weakest and most
vulnerable while cutting taxes for the wealthiest. These are also
moral issues and I can no longer say that abortion trumps them all.
The issues are too complex for that.
Abortion is certainly a political topic
and if it is significant to you, then you should factor that into
your voting decisions. However, I encourage you to think about other
important issues as well and recognize that by supporting an
anti-abortion politician (call them pro-life if you prefer), you may
at the same time be lending your support to other issues that are
also of significance to a voter who wants to see the values of the
Kingdom furthered in our society.
This is great. I finally quit worrying about voting on abortion when I realized there were millions of people who would do that for me, and there were all these other issues that no one seemed to care about. I had a conversation with a friend who was talking about how she lost so much respect for Laura Bush, simply b/c she's pro-choice. I wanted to say something so bad but didn't. But really, the respect we are given is based on one belief we have? ugggg.
ReplyDelete