Posted on 10/13/2020 8:04:20 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
The Christian Post fully endorses the conviction that whichever candidate a pro-life voter chooses to support in the electoral process is a matter of individual conscience. However, while people are certainly entitled to their own opinion they are not entitled to their own facts. When a guest opinion article employs arguments that severely lack factual context, The Christian Post believes it has a journalistic responsibility to its readers to provide that context and perspective in order to help our readers to decide for themselves the best way to express their pro-life convictions in the voting booth.
Recently a group of pro-life evangelicals, some of them noted biblical scholars, argued in favor of voting Joe Biden into the White House in November, asserting “as pro-life evangelicals, we disagree with Vice President Biden and the Democratic platform on the issue of abortion. But we believe that a biblically shaped commitment to the sanctity of human life compels us to a consistent ethic of life that affirms the sanctity of human life from beginning to end.“
Certainly every Christian in America has the constitutional freedom to weigh the panoply of issues confronting America and to vote Democrat or Republican accordingly. Moreover, expanding the concept of sanctity of life to encompass pre-birth to death, the so-called “ethic of life” as described by this group, is a worthy biblical exercise.
The group cites four examples of Democratic post-birth policies that outweigh their opposition on Roe v. Wade. But do these examples really outweigh the fact that more than 60 million babies have been aborted since Roe v. Wade was decided in 1973? Let’s take a closer look.
Their first example of a “consistent ethic” concerns the President’s Emergency Plan For Aids Relief. PEPFAR is a highly successful international program launched by President George W. Bush that seeks to fight AIDS through fundamental improvement of healthcare in developing countries. The program has enjoyed bipartisan support ever since it was implemented and has already saved an estimated 17 million lives. The pro-life for Biden group asserts that a proposed $800 million Trump administration cut to the program is a sanctity of life issue.
What the group doesn’t point out is the fact that other first world countries have stepped up coordination with PEPFAR as a result of Trump’s overall effort to get other rich nations to shoulder their fair share of humanitarian aid. According to then U.S. Global AIDS Coordinator Dr. Debra Birx (now of COVID fame), Trump’s proposed budget “has actually helped me in communication with governments to talk about how the expectation of this administration is that our programs become more and more impactful with the dollars we have.” Dr. Birx asserted in a briefing: “In 2009, I think we had 4 to 5 million people on treatment. We now have 15.7 [million]. That doesn’t happen without developing amazing efficiencies and effectiveness.”
The group also doesn’t point out that more than half of the $800 million would be plowed back into domestic AIDS-fighting programs under the Trump budget, including more money to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to provide additional testing, treatment and prevention services, including the hiring of more public health staff in local jurisdictions. The Trump plan would also add funding to Community Health Centers to boost access to HIV prevention services. In addition, the U.S. Indian Health Service would get more funds for HIV prevention, diagnosis and treatment. This is part of Trump’s policy to bring more focus to Americans in need, while asking other nations to step up their humanitarian aid internationally.
The “pro-life for Biden” group’s other examples are even less compelling. They argue that repealing and replacing the Affordable Care Act is sanctity of life issue, as if the Democrats’ federal option for health care is the only option to save lives and all other health care options, such as Trump policies for more price transparency, consumer-based decisions, and interstate competition, are definite killers. There are legitimate arguments on both sides. It is too simplistic to assert that only one side supports the sanctity of life.
Then the group argues that racism is a killer and that the Trump administration is more racist than a Biden administration would be. They ignore significant Trump efforts to improve the lives of black Americans, including record low unemployment, criminal justice reform (which could have easily passed in previous Democratic administrations), and stable funding for historically black universities. Moreover, a new Federal Reserve report issued late last month reveals that the Trump economy helped improve median wealth for black families by 33 percent and by 65 percent for Hispanic families, compared to only a 3 percent increase for white families, over the same 2016-2019 period. Once again, it is too simple to label one party in this debate virtuous and the other party evil.
In fact, Roe v. Wade is considered to be one of the most racist policies ever adopted in American politics, since five out of every eight aborted babies in the U.S. over the last 47 years were people of color. That’s almost 40 million black citizens! The “pro-life for Biden” group never addresses this.
The last argument, on climate change, is by far the weakest. Picking up on standard climate alarmism language, the group simply calls Trump a denier and argues his energy policies threaten to kill millions. The group ignores any counter arguments, such as those recently voiced by noted environmentalists Bjorn Lomborg (who won the Nobel Peace Prize) and Michael Shellenberger (founder and president of Environmental Progress), that current climate change trends are not apocalyptic and that climate alarmism has done more harm than good. In fact, Shellenberger argues that some global warming may significantly reduce the world’s hunger problem by turning places like Greenland into a productive food-producing region.
So in conclusion, the “pro-life argument for Joe Biden” consists of one problematic half-truth and three well-worn Democratic talking points easily exposed as more bombast than critical political thought.
These four arguments do a poor job countering the fact that Biden-Harris is the most pro-abortion ticket in political history.
Is there a pro-life argument for Joe Biden? We think it’s a hard sell.
That’s what I love about my fellow Christians - they are always looking for the best in people, any spark of hope or redemption.
But in this case. NO. Just no.
They support Joe Biden and Kamalhoe over Trump BECAUSE they’re pro life???
Nothing but democrats masquerading as evangelical Christians.
Who is known as the Father of Lies?
Could it be.....
SATAN?
Yet another front group, infiltrating and subverting.
Too many words. Just say “Absolutely Not!”. Answer to question and end of article.
NO!
That’s the conclusion of the article. You summarized it in ONE WORD. :)
No, but there will be about 9% who call themselves Evangelicals that will vote for Biden.
The republican party wants babies to be born cared for and adopted if the Mommy can take care of the baby
The Democrat party wants babies to be murdered chopped up in their little baby body parts sold for as much profit as possible
OK now political liberal anti-Jesus true Christian post
Now please tell me what party you support
?
There is no way you can both claim to be a Christian and also support and vote for Biden. They are incompatible.
NO, The Democrats publicly pledged their allegiance to Satan at their 2012 national convention.
Could it be.....
SATAN?
________________________
No! that would be the board and administration of the “Christian” Post. Nothing Christian about them.
Everything spewed by them and this rag publication is totally in the wrong side of the Christian faith.
God have mercy on their unrighteous souls when they appear before you for judgement. Christ will not stand in for them as “He knew them not”.
Here’s what they do to their congressmen who are pro lifers
BECAUSE THE (in name only Democrats) DEMONS DID NOT LIKE THE VOTING OF CONGRESSMAN DAN LIPINSKI AND HIS NON SUPPORT OF ABORTION OR BEING THE ONLY DEMOCRAT CONGRESSMEMBER VOTING AGAINST ALLOWING MALES TO CLAIM THEY’RE FEMALE IN COLLEGE SPORTS.
THEY USED THE RECENT 2020 PRIMARY IN THE 3RD CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT ELECTION. TO GET THE DUMP LIPINSKI RESULTS THEY WANTED THAT WAS THROUGH REDISTRICTING NOT ONLY THE CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT BUT THE WARDS IN THE AREA
USING THE 2012 23RD WARD REMAP WHICH HAD FRAGMENTED THE ORIGINAL WARD AND REDUCED THE NUMBER OF PRECINCTS TO 39. IT ALSO LOCATED THE EXISTING 23RD WARD DEM OFFICES TO THE 14TH WARD AND REMOVED THE COMMUNITIES OF WEST LAWN, VITTUM PARK, ALONG WITH MAJOR PARTS OF GARFIELD RIDGE AND ARCHER HEIGHTS. THIS HAD VOTERS WONDER WHAT WARD THEY WERE LIVING IN AND WHERE THE POLLING PLACE WAS TO GO VOTE
IN THIS 2020 PRIMARY THEY CREATED COVID RELOCATIONS OF POLLING PLACES FOR THIS PRIMARY SURROUNDING CHICAGO MIDWAY AIRPORT WHICH OF COURSE AFFECTED TURNOUT BY DOING SO.
PROVED TRUE CONSERVATIVES IN CONGRESS ARE NO LONGER TOLERATED BY TODAYS SO CALLED DEMOCRATIC PARTY
HISTORY AND AREA HOW IDENTITY POLITICS AND WARD RE MAPPING DESTROYED THE COMMUNITIES WITHIN.
http://www.theusmat.com/mdwbea.htm
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.