A Pro-Life Position

Several weeks ago in our Sunday School discussion someone made a peripheral reference to the pro-life activities conducted on the fringes of the Democratic convention in Denver as a protest against the pro-choice (a.k.a. pro-abortion) stance of many of the Democratic party members present. Whereupon my father reminded everyone that neither party is as pro-life as Christians ought to be. He finished by saying that being pro-military is not being pro-life either.

Precisely.

My simmering stew of thoughts on this subject just now has come to a full boil since reading an article in Soujourners magazine today (“The Meaning of Life,” by Jim Rice and Jeannie Choi, Nov. 2008) . I’ve felt for a long time that while it’s easy to see the rightness of being pro-life and pro-family, many of the other positions supported by the party most solidly in this camp look very unrighteous when held up to the scrutiny of Scripture. I wondered why people so often miss this obvious circumstance. This isn’t shocking to anyone who expects the political process to operate outside the realm of Christian standards of behavior. This is exactly what a person with a clear two-kingdom concept of spiritual and earthly realities would expect to see. The problem occurs when party loyalty obscures the very real compromises of Scripture that may be present in what a given party stands for. Tragically, being caught up in party loyalties has an opportunity cost when good and right causes can not be enthusiastically supported because they are part of the “wrong” party’s platform.

I was surprised today when I realized how neatly many of the ideals that I hold dear have a pro-life stance at the center. It’s more clear to me than ever that that pro-life stance cannot be safely compromised. What has apparently surprised many Evangelicals recently is that these pro-life ideals can be found all over the political map. According to the Sojourner article, Christian people have come to see that creation care, health care, poverty alleviation, a peace position, and treating all humans with dignity are all pro-life positions. I see freedom in Christ through the new birth as the only pro-eternal-life hope available. People who have come to see these things often no longer see as clearly as before how Christians ought to vote. Sometimes they are even ashamed of their past political persuasions and involvements.

Here is an example of how inter-related some of these things are: Imagine a place where the natural environment has become so exploited and polluted that the water is not safe to drink and the soil is not fertile enough to grow crops. Yet people live in this place. The economic situation deteriorates and people become destitute. Babies born in these places can not be properly nourished or cared for. Their parents can not afford health care. People begin to quarrel over scarce resources, and war further decimates the land and causes suffering. Desperate parents sometimes sell their children into involuntary servitude. Women sell their bodies and often thereby provide a vehicle for the spread of disease. Death stalks life on many levels.

Christians are collectively called to do good to others. Individuals answer this call in a variety of life-affirming ways. You may find some of these people in the company of others with a variety of political persuasions. You will assuredly find many of them so busy with the business of seeking God and affirming life that they have no time for activism in the political process. They may have nothing at all to contribute to political discussions.

When God said in Deuteronomy 30:19 “. . . I have set before you life and death . . . therefore choose life . . . ” he was not issuing a political party invitation. That would have been far inferior to what God was offering instead–an ongoing relationship with Himself and blessing for those who love, obey and cling to Him.

In all its varied expressions, to choose life is the way of Christ, whether or not it is politically expedient.