Posted on 10/07/2020 8:40:12 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
In a period of less than 10 minutes on Monday, I read an article about candidate Joe Biden’s extreme pro-abortion views, and then was sent a link to the home page for “Pro-Life Evangelicals for Biden.”
The article cited Biden’s response to a question about abortion rights, where he addressed the potential of Amy Coney Barrett becoming a Supreme Court justice. Should that be the case, he said, and should the court overturn Roe v. Wade, “the only thing, the only responsible response to that would be to pass legislation making Roe the law of the land. That’s what I would do.”
This is in harmony with the Democratic platform, which plainly states, “We will repeal the Hyde Amendment, and protect and codify Roe v. Wade.”
In that light, how can you identify as a “pro-life” evangelical who supports Biden? Wouldn’t that be like declaring yourself a pro-abolition supporter of George B. McClellan, the Democratic candidate who ran against Abraham Lincoln in 1864? Or like declaring yourself an anti-segregation supporter of George Wallace? How can you identify as “pro-life” and yet actively campaign for the party of abortion?
The pro-Biden website states this, in all caps: “AS PRO-LIFE EVANGELICALS, WE DISAGREE WITH VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN AND THE DEMOCRATIC PLATFORM ON THE ISSUE OF ABORTION. BUT WE BELIEVE 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.”
In other words, while we think the slaughter of tens of millions innocent babies is a bad thing, and we’re willing to sacrifice their lives before they even enter this world, we do prefer the other policies of the Democrats, so they get our vote. Seriously?
How much different is this than saying, “While we have a problem with Pol Pot’s genocidal policies, we do think his other reforms serve in the best interest of the country, and so he gets our vote.”
To be clear, I am not comparing Joe Biden to Pol Pot (please repeat that 10 times slowly, since I am not making that comparison). But I am comparing the slaughter of the unborn to other mass moral atrocities, and for good reason. Thus, I find any evangelical justification of a vote for an aggressively pro-abortion candidate and party to be unethical. (Yes, this is my personal opinion. Each of us will give account to God, and He is the ultimate judge.)
How, then, do these evangelical leaders justify their position? They state, “Many things that good political decisions could change destroy persons created in the image of God and violate the sanctity of human life. Poverty kills millions every year. So does lack of healthcare and smoking. Racism kills. Unless we quickly make major changes, devastating climate change will kill tens of millions. Poverty, lack of accessible health care services, smoking, racism and climate change are all pro-life issues.”
And this is the justification for voting for a pro-abortion candidate? A candidate who wants to be sure that Roe v. Wade is the law of the land? A candidate who, during the campaign, reversed his longstanding support of the Hyde Amendment?
I agree that poverty kills, but Trump’s economic policies have helped alleviate poverty, not accelerate poverty.
As for lack of healthcare, both parties want good healthcare for all Americans but simply differ on the best way to achieve that.
As for smoking — yes, smoking — what on earth does that have to do with a vote for Biden? Does Trump, himself a non-smoker, encourage Americans to smoke? Would a vote for Biden be a vote against smoking?
As for racism killing people, perhaps what kills people is the stoking of racism, especially by the left? As for Americans literally killed because of racism every year, as tragic as even one such death would be, that number pails in comparison to the 700,000 (!) babies killed in their mother’s wombs every year. (In years past, that number has been twice as high.)
As for climate change and what should be done about that, there is intense scientific debate about the subject.
Yet, for these very reasons, we are being told not to vote for the strongest pro-life president we have ever had and rather to vote for the most radical, pro-abortion ticket in our nation’s history.
These pro-Biden evangelicals claim that “the most common reason women give for abortion is the financial difficulty of another child,” and so “we appreciate a number of Democratic proposals that would significantly alleviate that financial burden: accessible health services for all citizens, affordable childcare, a minimum wage that lifts workers out of poverty.”
Oh yes, if we vote Democrat, they will help these poor women out of their poverty, and thus abortions will be reduced.
In all honesty, I ask: Can you really say those words with a straight face in the presence of a holy God? Are you not perhaps driven more by deep opposition to Trump (as expressed quite forthrightly in other writings by some of this movement’s leaders) than by the hope that a vote for Democrats will help save babies’ lives?
The statement concludes with, “For these reasons, we believe that on balance, Joe Biden’s policies are more consistent with the biblically shaped ethic of life than those of Donald Trump. Therefore, even as we continue to urge different policies on abortion, we urge evangelicals to elect Joe Biden as president.”
Tell that to the more than 60 million babies slaughtered since 1973. Tell that to the babies viciously terminated in the third-trimester, some of them with their brains sucked out while still alive.
And tell that to Brenda Pratt Shafer, a registered nurse from Dayton, Ohio, who testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee on November 17, 1995 about what she witnessed when assisting a doctor abort a baby boy just over 26 weeks old.
She stated that the baby was alive and moving as the abortionist “delivered the baby’s body and arms – everything but the head. The doctor kept the baby’s head just inside the uterus. The baby’s little fingers were clasping and unclasping, his feet were kicking. Then the doctor stuck the scissors through the back of his head, and the baby’s arms jerked out in a flinch, a startle reaction, like a baby does when he thinks he might fall. The doctor opened up the scissors, stuck a high-powered suction tube into the opening and sucked the baby’s brains out. Now the baby was completely limp.”
These “pro-life” evangelicals are voting for the party that has supported these barbaric procedures for years. Indeed, they are calling on other Christians to vote for the party that opposes the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, which would guarantee medical care for a baby that survives abortion.
In fact, as senator, vice presidential candidate Kamala Harris voted against this very Act, and “earlier this year she voted against the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Act, which would have protected unborn babies from abortion procedures after the point at which they can feel pain (20 weeks).”
Yet these enlightened evangelicals state they “oppose ‘one issue’ political thinking because it lacks biblical balance.”
With all respect, I say this: Do not talk to me about “biblical balance” while urging evangelical followers of Jesus to vote for the party that justifies the slaughter of more than 60 million babies in their mother’s womb and will fight tooth and nail to codify Roe v. Wade.
Any mention of “biblical balance” that doesn’t start with concern for the shedding of innocent blood is so far out of balance it is no longer biblical.
If they choose abortion over mean tweets then they aren’t really pro-life. And if they lie about that, what else are they lying about?
They are neither pro-life nor Christian
Just in a different direction.
What about pro-life Christians ???
I doubt any of them will vote for Joe...
They are neither pro-life nor Christian
_______________________________________
Amen!
Most evangelicals are pretty hum-drum and reasonable. I am one, being Cumberland Presbyterian. I think I would agree with you that some seem wacko when you get into Fundamentalism (100% literal translation of the Bible) or those of the Charismatic traditions (emphasis on speaking in tongues and other Spirit driven behaviors). Most Evangelicals are pretty down to earth like Southern Baptists, United Methodists, PCA Presbyterian and other similar.
How do we know this isn’t a fake site set up by the rats to try to convince pro-life people to vote for the scum?
RatRipper wrote:
Most evangelicals are pretty hum-drum and reasonable. I am one, being Cumberland Presbyterian. I think I would agree with you that some seem wacko when you get into Fundamentalism (100% literal translation of the Bible) or those of the Charismatic traditions (emphasis on speaking in tongues and other Spirit driven behaviors). Most Evangelicals are pretty down to earth like Southern Baptists, United Methodists, PCA Presbyterian and other similar.
____________________________________
If I’m reading your post correctly… You are stating that it is your belief that Christian fundamentalists who believe that the Bible 100% correct… Are to your definition “WACKOS”
Is that what you’re saying?
Otherwise known as heretics who have itching ears.
Or existent.
Roe v Wade will eventually be overturned and thrown back to the states. At that time a MAJOR curse will be lifted off America.
More people in this world are realizing that KILLING BABIES IS WRONG. Just like Nazis killing Jews is wrong.
The liberal demonrats are on the wrong side of history - the same as the Nazis.
Only very stupid people fall for this but unfortunately America has millions like this.
RE: Roe v Wade will eventually be overturned and thrown back to the states. At that time a MAJOR curse will be lifted off America.
In the meantime, over 60 million babies 1 in 6 of our population, have been killed in the womb.
I’m not even sure if it will be outlawed in ANY state by then. 50 years of doing something with the major soceital institutions favoring it has a way of numbing our ccollective conscience.
The Bible is 100% correct, but some interpretations of scripture are off base. I say that you cannot interpret every passage of scripture in a literal fashion. Was the “burning bush” a literal burning bush, or was it God manifesting himself in a bush with part of his brilliant glory shining through. The best way Moses had to describe it was as a “burning bush”. I definitely believe that God is the creator, but I also believe that Moses described creation using the limited language he had based on the inspiration of God. Obviously, he was not there to see it happen.
I believe that the Bible is the word of God and the infallible rule of faith and practice. I believe the Bible is God-breathed and based on the inspiration of God. I also believe that many interpretations too quickly throw out literal interpretations in places where they should not. But I also understand that there is a lot of context and background that is ignored when absolute literal interpretation is employed in every case. If literal interpretation is taken to the max, those people who insist on that would appear to me to be wacko, yes.
My Dad was a minister. His take on proper interpretation of scripture was this: if the Bible is interpreted properly, then it fits life like a glove. My experience is that he was correct.
They are neither pro-life nor Christian
That’s right!! God will deal with them.......
Of course, being in a remote northern part of the northeast, I don't think I've met many evangelicals.
And yet you stated that those who may have a different interpretation of the Word of God are “wackos”…
Are you sure that is the word you want to use?
This is a stupid article. No pro-life evangelical is going to vote for a man who backs baby-killing(abortion). If a man votes for Biden, he is not being true to his soul.
We have some in our nondenominational evangelical church. It seems unlikely that anyone who loves Christ would vote for the party of atheism, abortion, and anarchy. They are going to join the majority of Antifa and BLM members in voting a solid Democrat ticket. I myself used to be a Democrat in my youth. I must remain loving, kind, and patient while I pray for them to come to see the error of their ways.
In our previous church, everyone was conservative.
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.