October 15, 2024 • 32 mins
- “What About Abortion? Should this one issue determine how Christians vote?” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RvWD7ykNjCc&t=675s
- Guttmacher article, https://www.guttmacher.org/2024/03/despite-bans-number-abortions-united-states-increased-2023
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:00):
So like to worship Gah, to worship God, Gah.
(00:03):
To worship Gah.
So.
Oh, sorry.
Oh, man.
God.
Yeah.
Worshiping God.
What was I even saying?
Shoot.
Welcome to TikTok Theology, a podcast that tackles the major trending topics on social
media that concern the Christian faith.
I'm Meagan.
(00:24):
And I'm Steven.
We know you can't form a theology in three minutes or less, but those videos can identify
current issues.
TikTok will give us the prompt and then we'll do a deep dive.
Thanks for joining us in this exploration.
Hi friends.
Welcome back to TikTok Theology.
We are hanging out a few weeks before the election.
(00:46):
So as we prep, get ready, say our prayers, we felt like it was pertinent to talk about
one of those conversations that always inevitably comes up in politics, in day to day life,
especially if you're in a Christian circle.
We're talking about abortion today.
Just a good light little topic as we like to cover here.
(01:06):
Only light topics on TikTok Theology.
But obviously abortion is a conversation that has been had for a long, long time.
It's not new, but anytime we get closer to election season, any political season of life,
it obviously becomes a forefront conversation with Gen Z, especially now that more Gen Z
are going to be able to vote this year.
This is something that comes out on social media a lot.
(01:28):
Huge topic this time too.
Huge topic.
Especially this is our first presidential election post Roe v. Wade being overturned.
So there's a lot of conversation happening about it and we definitely want to engage
in that conversation as well.
Not let this topic pass us by.
So we titled this one Evangelicals on abortion.
We did that on purpose.
It's not that only evangelicals have that conversation.
(01:49):
But there is the notion that in politics we have what's called the quote unquote evangelical
vote, which is super problematic in its own right just to even think about like Thursday
monolithic vote that comes from evangelical people.
But this is something that they use in their metrics, how they how to gauge what's going
on.
And one of the biggest issues for the quote unquote evangelical vote is the topic of abortion.
(02:11):
And some people have become single or two issue voters because of it.
Does your candidate stand against or for abortion?
And that determines how they're going to vote.
That also has its own problems because they could be signing on to a lot of things that
are very, very bad and terrible.
Anti Jesus in different ways.
You know what I mean?
(02:32):
Yeah.
But that's the thing about politics is there's no candidate that's going to perfectly represent
every aspect of being for Jesus or being for Christianity or every aspect that we would
theologically uphold too because that's not how politics works.
Yeah.
And we wouldn't we shouldn't totally expect them to as we've been talking about this season
last season the whole time.
All the seasons.
This is all Babylon, right?
(02:53):
So governing in Babylon.
But I think what we need to talk about here is first, what did Roe versus Wade overturning
it actually do?
And then I want to talk about what are the philosophical differences between people who
are pro-life and pro-choice.
And then how should we as a church respond?
We've done a similar structure before and I think it will give us a more nuanced understanding
of the whole issue at hand.
(03:15):
So first.
So multifaceted.
So Roe versus Wade was a landmark decision in 1973 by the Supreme Court that made it
a federal right for women to have abortions.
And so essentially what that means is that a state can't outlaw or ban abortions.
And before that it was up to the states to decide what laws we're going to determine
(03:38):
if there's going to be an abortion or not.
And so this made it so that way it's just federally legal.
And granted up into that point, even states had been very, very specific about technically
abortions were allowed, but only at four weeks or something that would have essentially
outlawed abortions.
So it's not like there had been no abortion laws made in the states just because Roe v.
Wade was a thing.
(03:58):
No, every state essentially already had abortion laws and they had their own ways of functioning.
It's always been an issue, an ethical issue.
But in 2022, and no one ever thought that this would ever happen.
I for sure, I was thinking this is never going to be overturned.
And the reason why I thought it was never going to be overturned is because the way
the federal court system would work is it goes by precedent.
(04:20):
So if it is deciding something new, they're going to put into a big account what has been
decided before on an issue like it.
And there's been tons of times when there was opportunities for Roe v. Wade to be overturned.
And it didn't.
Because Roe v. Wade was the precedent.
Because it was the precedent, it became the precedent and then a bunch of even Supreme
courts that had a lot of conservative judges on it.
Still upheld.
(04:41):
They still upheld it.
And so it was just like, that's not going to be overturned.
But that was the goal of a bunch of Christians and evangelicals in this scenario is if we
can get enough conservative judges and we know their stance on Roe, then if a thing comes
up there, they can overturn it.
They have the power to do it.
So we just have to make sure that that happens.
And so that was a major point for conservatives electing a Republican president that was
(05:04):
against get your judges in there.
And then eventually enough, we'll have a majority in the lower term.
And so during the Trump presidency, he had the opportunity to nominate and put in three
different judges appointing to the Supreme Court.
Especially Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett, which just sidebar,
she comes from a charismatic background.
(05:26):
So that's pretty interesting.
And they were all like, he knew their position on abortion beforehand.
And so putting it in there seemed like a major win.
And just so happened, what was inexplicable did happen.
A case came up that could overturn Roe's weight and it was overturned finally 2022.
And it was a crazy landmark decision.
And a lot of people have been reeling ever since, like not knowing how to take it in
(05:47):
different ways.
It's been over 40 years.
And so essentially what happened is now it's back to the states to decide what their abortion
laws will be.
They don't have to make a federal mandate that they have to allow abortions.
So some states are still totally lax on their decisions like our state in California.
And then other states are very, very restrictive.
(06:09):
We've got straight up bans.
14 states now have a total abortion ban.
And then other states have more restrictive stuff.
See what happened was, and this is kind of crazy, the number of abortions actually went
up.
So from the 80s, there was roughly 1.6 million or so abortions happening 80s and 90s.
And then ever since then it was steadily declining.
(06:31):
There was a bunch of sociological reasons why it was steadily declining, but it was.
Then after the overturn of Roe's weight, it popped up and it was already starting to rise
slightly and then it rose even more.
And just what happened was the states that had lax laws, women went to them to get abortions.
There's been a lot of traveling for abortions.
(06:52):
And even in the US News and World Report, they released in January numbers that infant
deaths are higher, actually higher in states where there are total abortion bans.
So there's actually been higher numbers since Roe's weight was overturned.
So it's pretty wild and definitely a gray issue.
Now I will say, before we get into the philosophical arguments, I am, I don't like using the
(07:14):
super highly politicized terms, pro life, pro choice.
But if I were to, it would be pro life, but it would need to be nuanced in a way that
you're understanding like, what does that actually mean?
And we're going to talk about that a little bit more, but just so.
Just to say right off the bat, this isn't a pro abortion discussion.
It's just, we want to have a fair dialogue about how difficult this issue actually is.
(07:40):
So first let's talk about some of the arguments.
So these are philosophical arguments and some of them, they can be super reductionistic
and ridiculous.
But they're the kind of things that.
But these have been argued at some point or another.
So the main obvious one against abortion is killing people is wrong.
There's an obvious assumption there.
This is how it goes.
Killing innocent human beings is wrong.
(08:00):
The life of a human begins at conception.
So that is a key that not everyone agrees with.
That is true.
And that is.
Even some Christians don't necessarily agree with that.
And so that, and that's really, really significant point to how this argument falls.
So if, if that's the case, then the fetus is an instant human life, killing the fetus
is wrong.
Therefore, and they'll say, why is a fetus a person and not like a group of cells or
(08:24):
something like that?
Well, it has a unique genetic code already.
And so it's an individual.
Now obviously when we have a situation where a conception just happens, logically people
wouldn't be like, that's a human being, but we know that it potentially is or like it
will become one.
Like it's not like it's going to become something different.
(08:47):
Like well fetuses aren't even viable until a certain amount of time.
So it's like it actually could not live on its own.
Right.
But like if you see a seed, a mustard seed just kind of leaves a biblical reference.
If you look at it and you said that's a tree, it is not a tree.
It's not a tree.
It has the potential to be a tree.
Has the potential to be a tree.
And also like not the potential to be anything else.
Like it's gonna, like if you plan it and it could be.
(09:07):
But yes, it will be a tree.
It's not going to become grass or a shrub.
Right.
It'll be a tree.
But that's kind of the issue.
Some people say, but it's not a tree.
And unless you plant it and grow it and all that kind of stuff, it won't become a tree.
It's a seed.
And but then the other argument will say, but it will, that's the only thing it can
become and the natural way of it.
(09:28):
It's already been fertilized.
It's already been put in.
It's like, it's like putting that seed in the ground and then and then and already
planting it, that's what we're saying is already a tree if it's in process, right?
Especially with Christians, who can, we can point to verses and like Psalms and stuff
where it's like, you know, like you knit me together and my mother's word.
There's a very like, very, very strong sense of like the personhood of a fetus in that
(09:50):
sense because of especially language and verbatues to cross scripture.
Right.
But this is the real issue.
This is like, like there's other things that we're going to talk about, but the real underlying
issue is when does human life start because that's literally it because if you're just
removing something from your own body, then that is not an abortion.
But if you're removing another person, then that is.
(10:13):
And so some folks will say, this isn't a person.
It's like a seed.
It's a, it's a possibility of a person.
It's a person in a certain situation.
It will become a person, but it isn't one.
So terminating that is not terminating life.
It's terminating a possibility.
Yeah.
The potential for life.
Which is, which is different.
So fundamentally, if you do not believe that a fetus at a certain age is not a person,
(10:36):
then an abortion is not ethically wrong.
Because you're not, you're not changing anything.
That's like cutting your hair or like, and I know that sounds like obviously it's not
the same people will be, that's egregious to say that.
But if it's a part of your body that you're,
Are like appendicitis.
You go in and you cut the appendix out.
Right.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Anything like that.
(10:56):
And then some people will be like, no, well, it has a DNA of a person, but like, and this
is where the arguments can get ridiculous.
But like, let's say I lose my finger, my fingers on the ground.
Right.
That has my DNA.
Yeah.
But that's not a person.
Yeah.
It's not going to regrow a you.
It's not going to regrow me.
But they'll say, but that DNA does grow into a you.
You don't say so.
I think this is one of those conversations that everyone has a different, has a different
(11:21):
like starting point.
We never agree on terms.
No one agrees on when things are happening.
That's the biggest problem though.
So we're all talking past each other about a different argument because it, if you're
in an argument, if you have a pro life view of life beginning at conception, you're arguing
with someone who doesn't believe that life begins at conception, then they're actually
fundamentally just different arguments.
They're fundamentally different arguments.
And so like that's, that's kind of the beginning of it.
I'm not saying that you should change your view because I believe that human life happens
(11:44):
at conception, but I can understand why a person doesn't.
If they have like that view of like, there's a potentiality there and stuff.
And then at least I will become more gracious towards that other view.
I won't necessarily call that person a murderer.
Correct.
You know what I mean?
And that's, that's a big deal.
Yeah.
Right?
I would agree.
So anyways, some other arguments, you know, killing potential people is wrong because
(12:07):
it would be wrong to ruin a person's potential.
You know, killing beings with a future like ours is wrong.
This person can have a future like ours.
Causing pain is wrong in general, causing pain and a fetus is sufficiently developed
to feel pain by 18 weeks.
So anybody that has an abortion, they will feel pain.
And then, so those are kind of like regular ones that you'll hear.
Another interesting one is increasing the tolerance of killing is wrong on a societal
(12:30):
level.
Like desensitizing to, to the loss of human life, I guess they would say.
And so like allowing abortion is legalizing killing, even if we're not talking about murder,
it is killing of some sort of life.
And so it reduces a person's respect for life, reduces society's respect for life.
This is generally a bad thing.
And I think that's actually, that has some power in, in ethics of life.
(12:53):
Yeah, that has a merit.
Absolutely.
Yeah.
So that argument.
So those are kind of like the two arguments that are strong on that side, I think.
So the arguments for abortion, and these are not just, they're not typically for abortions
in general.
They're for abortions in selected cases.
Yeah.
I have a hard time when people say like pro-choices being pro-abortion because I don't think anyone
gets pregnant to get an abortion.
Like that's never like a woman is like, ooh, I'm gonna get pregnant just so I can kill
(13:17):
it.
You know, like that's, that's not actually the conversation.
And that I feel like is almost what, what happened is these like demonizing women as
if they plot and scheme to get pregnant just so that they can terminate their pregnancy.
You know, sometimes you may see like in a protest, somebody having a sign that's flippant
like that.
Yeah.
And that's terrible.
And that's, those should not happen.
(13:38):
Agreed.
Because the, the actual choice that a woman makes is a very difficult choice.
Yes.
That's very personal for women.
100%.
It's, it's not this flippant little desire thing, typically, right?
Typically, right.
So one is, and we kind of talked about this, the fetus is not necessarily a person.
It's not a person with the right to live.
So a collection of human cells does not have the right to live just because it is of the
human species.
Like that's the argument for amputating a limb.
(14:01):
You know, you know, collection of human cells only has a right to live by virtue of a few
different facts.
One, it may be a reached a particular state of development that makes it a moral person.
Yeah.
And then, or it possesses certain properties that make it a moral person.
The problem with calling it a moral person is like even a baby that's been born is not
moral.
(14:21):
Yeah.
You know what I mean?
If you think of any theology of we're all fallen people, then actually technically.
That baby ain't no altruist.
No.
Baby ain't no altruist.
Selfish.
We're all, as we all are.
The little baby is an egoist.
Oh.
That's what it is.
That's what it is.
All cares about is eating.
Calling your local baby an egoist.
But yeah.
(14:42):
So even if you take out the idea of a moral person, they might say like a rational person
or a thinking person or, or some of that cognitive person, some of that.
Another argument, it is not always wrong to end a life of an innocent person.
Now that sounds interesting, but there are some very specific cases where that's the
case.
So there's cases where you have to choose between two innocent people.
(15:04):
For example, a conjoined twins, like where they'll both die.
Right.
And, but you have to choose which person to live.
That's very, very difficult.
Mountaineering.
This is like so specific.
Yeah.
It's a, you know, when a person can only save their own life by cutting the rope of someone
who's fallen.
I always think of a, did you watch Ace Matero too?
No.
When the greatest movies.
(15:25):
Yeah, you're a fan of that.
Yeah.
It's so funny.
But in the beginning, he's like mountaineering and he has like a little raccoon and he has
to cut the rope of the raccoon.
Yeah.
Raccoon's dying.
It's all dramatic.
It's so good.
Anyways, this one is crucial and talked about a lot, but the case of a woman who might die
if there isn't an abortion.
(15:45):
And so I think a lot of pro life people will rebuttal that and be like, that isn't the
same thing.
I mean, it is technically right.
They would have an abortion.
So technically it's the same thing.
But the difference there is you're not choosing to terminate the life as just a general choice.
You're having to make the decision between two lives, which is a terrible decision anybody
(16:06):
would be put into.
Yeah.
Absolutely.
And so, and so that's just a, you know, that's, but it's a different scenario.
And then this, the big one too that you'll hear a lot of times is the pregnant woman
has moral rights, has, has her own rights, reproductive rights.
Under some circumstances, these rights might override the fetus's right to live.
(16:28):
And so what might it be?
The right of ownership of her own body, the right to decide her own future, the right
to take decisions without moral or legal intervention by others.
And the pregnant woman has a right to life.
So not aborting the fetus would put the mother's life in danger.
So that one's a little bit different here, but like the other things here that we talked
(16:49):
about, right to her own body.
The question is here, does that right negate the right of the unborn child?
Well, if you think of the fetus as an unborn child, like a human being, then pro-life advocates
would say, no, it doesn't because that's a human person.
So the right to have ownership of your own body is true except for the fact that you're
(17:11):
dealing with another person's body, right?
But if you do not view that as another person, then it's not the same.
Then it's not the same.
Then it's just you having the right to do things with your own body.
So you see this a fundamental difference philosophically and it tends to hinge on where everyone's
coming from, when everybody's coming from your view of when life starts as a human, when
(17:33):
it's human life start.
Those are the arguments.
What do you think, how do you think about those?
Do you know of any other arguments?
Is that generally what we hear?
I mean, those are probably the big ones, especially then you get really nuanced and you're like,
well, if a girl is raped or something and then they get pregnant and they're like under
age or something and it's like, well, that kind of blanket banning or this kind of whatever
(17:54):
like actually really puts somebody else in danger.
So I think that there's really nuance.
There's just always going to be situations on both sides of the coin.
I also do think that like these conversations are very gloss over other things like IVF
where you're like, oh, well, if you're doing like, if life starts at conception and all
them little homies in the Petri dish, when Christians are doing IVF are technically
(18:17):
people.
So then are you very comfortable?
So it's like, there's elements of all of it that if you keep going down the line, it's
just not as easy as saying one or the other.
There is a Catholic ethics that will not allow for any contraceptions at all because of that
very reason.
Like they'll trace it all the way back to that.
So it's like, I think it's just one of those situations that if you follow them all the
(18:39):
way out either way, it's just never as simple as being like, I'm always this or I'm always
that.
And so I think that that's what, if anything from all of these different pro and against
arguments, like you kind of have to see that it's never as easy as always and never.
It's never like, oh, I'm always, I'm always going to be anti-borscht on it.
And it's like, oh, it's until it's your person, you know, like until it's your daughter or
(19:01):
it's somebody who like is in danger for their life or something like that.
You know, like it's just very easy when it's not like to have these opinions and these
thoughts when you're outside of it.
But I also think that all of these conversations, like we have to be really inviting Jesus into
them.
Like we have to really, really invite Jesus into these spaces where it's like, okay, like
I know a lot of Christians who are like, well, it's not worth aborting if the like
(19:22):
woman's life is at danger because what if God heals them?
You know, like those kinds of conversations.
And so it's just never as easy as I'm always against abortion or I'm never, you know,
which should put us to pause on being too judgmental on this thing.
Immediately.
That's the number one.
Even if you hold positions like, like you and I do, we just can't be judgmental towards
(19:43):
people because it is much more complicated than that.
So one thing that I think a lot of pro-life folks will typically agree to is the exceptions
of an abortion being rape, incest, or the death of the mother, like potential death
of the mother, at least that last one virtually everyone agrees with.
Like when you make that decision, you have to choose one or the other.
(20:06):
And they usually choose, sometimes you hear different arguments, but like typically the
life of the mother is prioritized over the life of the unborn child.
Reason being, I can speak, like if that was the situation with my wife, Connie has already
affected many lives.
Whereas the unborn child hasn't.
And that's a tragedy either way.
But I would choose my wife.
Right.
I know a lot of husbands who when they're put in situations, even when their wife is
(20:28):
giving birth have had to be in situations where it's like, this is not going well.
Who are we saving?
And that's usually what people will say.
And you know, it's hard to judge either way.
Now the rape and incest one, I've heard lots of people push back on that.
And so for example, with a rape, they say that's not the woman's choice ever to have
the child.
And it's completely utterly unfair to her.
(20:48):
And the pushback will be totally is unfair.
But it's also unfair for the child to lose her life because who was actually unfair was
a rapist.
It was a person who caused that.
And that person should be penalized, but not the child.
Very rarely are.
And so that's a, so you hear a pushback on that too.
So like, and then you can get into like, what if there was rape when the child was under
(21:11):
age and all sorts of stuff like that.
And like just very hairy, complicated issues that if, if, if you were in that situation
or some of you love was in that situation, it'd just be a very different story.
And so the best advice there is before you go judge on somebody else, try to make that
situation personal and then see how you respond.
Cause I think we would all be very, have very different responses if we either personally
(21:34):
experienced it or someone that we cared about and loved was personally experiencing it.
At least your approach would be more gracious.
A little more, a little more gracious, which kind of speaks then to the, the damage unfortunately
that Christians or pro-life, you know, advocates have done in these kinds of protests as they
give about abortion, especially with like the use of the terminology, like calling women
(21:56):
murderers when they've had an abortion, but you don't know necessarily why they've had
an abortion.
Like that just never happened.
Like, I mean, that should just never happen.
Ever.
Like I'm so sorry.
Like if one take away, don't call anyone a murder, that's like, that's just so devastating,
especially for a woman in that position.
Like they're probably like, you get to that point with a lot of pain and there's a lot
(22:19):
of decisions and thoughts that have gone into that.
And then for someone in such a like very vulnerable state, maybe like, you're a murder.
Like that is really hard.
And I think it's done a lot of damage for the Christian conversation about this topic
because people feel like, Oh, well Christians are anti me, anti woman, anti mom who had
to get an abortion.
(22:39):
We talked about in our first episode of this season, um, that's kind of the Christians
are mean.
Like there's no grace there is no love there towards somebody.
Even if, even if you think what they did was wrong, there's still no love or grace towards
that person who made a difficult decision that wasn't easy for him.
Absolutely.
And that's been, I think I've done a lot of damage with Christians engaging in this conversation,
which I think is what we're trying to do here is reengage in a way that is biblical,
(23:04):
but also ministerial and meets people where they're at and has grace and has compassion
and empathy for a situation that would be devastating for any of us to be in.
Cause we have to reframe it.
Like this is not a protest.
This is a, like we have to engage in this and not make moms who had an abortion feel
like they can't go to church or feel like they can't talk with us or that they're less
(23:25):
than us because of decisions that they've had to come to at some point in their lives.
And it's a, it's a decision that's also over.
Right?
Like so.
Like no coming back from that.
So, you know, to, to bring psychological damage to someone that already has dealt with very
difficult things.
I don't see how, how it can possibly be helpful.
Yeah.
(23:45):
Yeah.
So one thing that I think is really important and an argument that is, is given against
people who are pro-life is that they're not really pro-life.
They're pro-birth because after the baby's born, they don't really help with any rights
on anything else.
And so that argument, I think it doesn't get to the heart of the abortion argument, whether
(24:09):
where life starts, but what it does do is it calls out a double standard that Christians
are functioning under.
And so Christians believe or they, they root this idea of pro-life, they should anyways,
under a general ethics of life that is rooted in scripture.
God is life.
God is existence itself.
All things are drawn into existence from God to use kind of like this paul tillic terms.
(24:33):
You know, life is drawn from the source of life, the giver of life, the spirit is life.
Adam and Eve had the tree of knowledge of good and evil and tree of life.
And then if you ate from the tree of life, you would live.
You would have everlasting life.
These are, these are concepts that are not like insignificant or small, but heavily rooted
scripturally and should be a part of every Christians ethics.
(24:54):
And if that is the case, then you would think that they would generally have a disposition
against abortions, at least in a flippant way, but you can have a nuanced understanding
of like the difficulty of the decision, but still have a general sense of like, we're
going to be for the things that produce life, the things that give life.
And so that argument, I think is pretty dang important.
(25:16):
I would agree.
Hey, you're going to, you're going to put these Christians on blast for saying that
they are for life, you know, advocates of an ethics of life, but then at the same time,
you're not going to help women with healthcare.
You're not going to help them with childcare, with the kids education.
You're not going to help walk with women through pregnancy.
You're not going to help them see a future that's possible if they kept the child.
(25:41):
Yeah.
You're not going to reform the foster care system.
You're not going to help give them more maternity leave.
You're not going to help.
And then we love your kid.
We love your baby until it's a person of color, until it's LGBTQ plus, until it's all these
things.
And then you get, you're born and then we immediately don't like you or we immediately
have an issue with you.
(26:01):
And that's the double standard.
And that's the double standard that we have here.
The thing is, if you have an ethics of life, then what we should be looking for is instead
of talking about pro-life in that way, maybe we should talk about just like the basic ethics
term that we're talking about human flourishing.
Yeah.
Right?
Like that's the reason why we believe in this ethics of life is for humans to flourish.
And we do live the good life for human flourishing.
(26:23):
So what are the things that can help a human flourish?
And if it is the woman go into term, but finding a way of living that won't destroy her future
and you can show that she can flourish, I think you're going to be able to reduce abortions
on a much greater scale than any law can do.
Yeah, I would agree.
(26:43):
I want there to be less abortions because I'm pro-life.
I want there to be drastically and significantly less abortions.
What is the best way to do it?
How can you reduce abortions?
And that's a different question than should we overturn Rover's weight or make laws more
restrictive for women and stuff like that?
Yeah.
If you just peel everything back and you look at the ethics of life, then you're going to
(27:05):
be like, okay, this 17-year-old girl that had a baby, she made mistakes, whatever.
Like literally, who cares?
You do not have to think about the reason why someone is giving birth.
That's not even...
Yeah, it's not important.
It's not important.
Think about what's going to happen.
Yeah.
That young girl is going to bring a human life into the world and you want her to bring
(27:28):
the human life.
You want her to be a good mother and you want the child to grow up in a good environment,
in a country that cares for everybody involved.
Yeah.
Right?
So make that happen.
Make that happen.
Make it so that way that young girl can still have a career, have a job, still be able to
do stuff.
(27:49):
Make the pathways for human flourishing to happen for both the baby and the woman.
And you know what you're doing?
You're helping an American citizen thrive.
Yes.
Is it not something our government should do?
It is definitely something our government should do.
Kind of crazy.
Yeah.
I mean, even as we get up into these political...
Like we're not here to change anybody's votes or anything, but I think it's important
to consider that if you're only voting for a candidate because they're anti-abortion,
(28:11):
but they're also not pro reform of healthcare, they're not pro reforming the adoption and
foster care system.
If they're not pro any of that, then is this a false sense of security?
Are you saying, oh, well, at least I know that they're not for abortion.
But are they for life?
Like are they actually pro-life?
If you take the idea of just having ethics of life and just like actually...
(28:35):
So what you're supposed to do philosophically, you're supposed to look at an argument and
look at its explanatory power.
How much can it actually explain?
And does it explain a lot of different things?
And then it's a good argument.
We're going to see if it's reasoned well, if it's clear, but we also have to see if
it's consistent, if it's coherent, and if it's comprehensive, those three things are
(28:56):
crucial.
So like if you believe something, but you don't consistently hold it, then do you actually
believe it?
You're just actually giving a one-off.
You're giving some evidence for some various belief, but your actual beliefs are something
different.
So if you hold to an ethics of life, what should your views of war be?
What should your views of capital punishment be?
(29:17):
What should your views of gun violence be?
What should those views, if you're talking about human flourishing, about life because
God is life and all of our lives exist in him, right?
So if you become a single issue voter and you are against abortion, but you are for
war and capital punishment, all these other things, I was for capital punishment.
(29:39):
I was a youth pastor and this kid, he was like 14 or 15 or something.
And I was like, you know, capital punishment makes sense because it's fair.
Like if somebody murders somebody, then you know, like eye for an eye, they should, that's
what's there.
And then he was like, he just so quickly said, he's like, but if you murder them, then they
can't be saved.
(30:01):
And then I was just like, oh man, that's like super duper right.
Oh, that's good.
Do you take out the possibility for this guy to be redeemed?
It made me rethink everything there, you know, and just like, and like it was inconsistent
with my idea of life of like, so I'm no longer for capital punishment, life imprisonment
for show.
Show a minute.
And if we're going to be pro-life, then let's work on being Christians who have care groups
(30:25):
in their churches for moms who've been through abortions, who let's think about how to provide
daycare for young moms who've had kids and can't afford to put their kid in daycare because
it's mad expensive, or let's figure out how to find out what local resources in our area
can help, like what's your local pregnancy center, like how can we come around instead
of being mean and against it, if we're going to be pro-life, then let's figure out how
(30:49):
to practically put our boots on the ground and not just vote for our morals.
But how do we as Christians, as believers come around and support the people who've actually
and genuinely gone through these things?
How can you be really pro-life?
Yeah.
How can we be really and genuinely pro-life?
How can we take these young moms kids to school?
Can we help bring them meals when we know that they're struggling?
(31:10):
Can we raise money and help them buy supplies or whatever?
How can we support the women and the kids and the fathers who've gone through this kind
of stuff?
Let's put our money where our mouth is and not just vote politically, but how do we actually
live a pro-life life?
And recognize too that it's not forever.
(31:31):
It's not like a woman that had a baby and was considering abortion, but now is being
helped by the church.
They're not going to be infants forever.
These kids are going to grow up.
If you are a church that's loving and kind towards this whole family, guess what?
That is a witness that goes beyond that family.
So not only are you not on the hook forever to care for this child, but if you do properly
(31:52):
care for this child and his family and love them.
That is more powerful of a witness than standing outside an abortion clinic with a sign.
Much more powerful.
And it's actually doing the work that Christ has called us to do because He calls us to
be for the orphans and the widows.
Maybe we just put in the same thing, single mothers who had an abortion.
Love them, care for them, help them.
Don't think that it was right to have an abortion.
(32:12):
You don't have to.
You don't have to and we don't.
But you can still love them and help them and dignify them as human beings and be the
church to them and for them.
All right.
It's good.
Well, hopefully that discussion, I don't know if it brings clarity or for it muddies
things up more, but I think that's kind of the nature of it.
Right?
Like it's a difficult conversation.
And these are conversations worth having.
Worth having though.
(32:33):
All right.
Well, this was brought to you by the School of Theology and Ministry.
We'll see you guys next time.
Bye.
So like to worship Gah, to worship God, Gah.
(00:03):
To worship Gah.
So.
Oh, sorry.
Oh, man.
God.
Yeah.
Worshiping God.
What was I even saying?
Shoot.
Welcome to TikTok Theology, a podcast that tackles the major trending topics on social
media that concern the Christian faith.
I'm Meagan.
(00:24):
And I'm Steven.
We know you can't form a theology in three minutes or less, but those videos can identify
current issues.
TikTok will give us the prompt and then we'll do a deep dive.
Thanks for joining us in this exploration.
Hi friends.
Welcome back to TikTok Theology.
We are hanging out a few weeks before the election.
(00:46):
So as we prep, get ready, say our prayers, we felt like it was pertinent to talk about
one of those conversations that always inevitably comes up in politics, in day to day life,
especially if you're in a Christian circle.
We're talking about abortion today.
Just a good light little topic as we like to cover here.
(01:06):
Only light topics on TikTok Theology.
But obviously abortion is a conversation that has been had for a long, long time.
It's not new, but anytime we get closer to election season, any political season of life,
it obviously becomes a forefront conversation with Gen Z, especially now that more Gen Z
are going to be able to vote this year.
This is something that comes out on social media a lot.
(01:28):
Huge topic this time too.
Huge topic.
Especially this is our first presidential election post Roe v. Wade being overturned.
So there's a lot of conversation happening about it and we definitely want to engage
in that conversation as well.
Not let this topic pass us by.
So we titled this one Evangelicals on abortion.
We did that on purpose.
It's not that only evangelicals have that conversation.
(01:49):
But there is the notion that in politics we have what's called the quote unquote evangelical
vote, which is super problematic in its own right just to even think about like Thursday
monolithic vote that comes from evangelical people.
But this is something that they use in their metrics, how they how to gauge what's going
on.
And one of the biggest issues for the quote unquote evangelical vote is the topic of abortion.
(02:11):
And some people have become single or two issue voters because of it.
Does your candidate stand against or for abortion?
And that determines how they're going to vote.
That also has its own problems because they could be signing on to a lot of things that
are very, very bad and terrible.
Anti Jesus in different ways.
You know what I mean?
(02:32):
Yeah.
But that's the thing about politics is there's no candidate that's going to perfectly represent
every aspect of being for Jesus or being for Christianity or every aspect that we would
theologically uphold too because that's not how politics works.
Yeah.
And we wouldn't we shouldn't totally expect them to as we've been talking about this season
last season the whole time.
All the seasons.
This is all Babylon, right?
(02:53):
So governing in Babylon.
But I think what we need to talk about here is first, what did Roe versus Wade overturning
it actually do?
And then I want to talk about what are the philosophical differences between people who
are pro-life and pro-choice.
And then how should we as a church respond?
We've done a similar structure before and I think it will give us a more nuanced understanding
of the whole issue at hand.
(03:15):
So first.
So multifaceted.
So Roe versus Wade was a landmark decision in 1973 by the Supreme Court that made it
a federal right for women to have abortions.
And so essentially what that means is that a state can't outlaw or ban abortions.
And before that it was up to the states to decide what laws we're going to determine
(03:38):
if there's going to be an abortion or not.
And so this made it so that way it's just federally legal.
And granted up into that point, even states had been very, very specific about technically
abortions were allowed, but only at four weeks or something that would have essentially
outlawed abortions.
So it's not like there had been no abortion laws made in the states just because Roe v.
Wade was a thing.
(03:58):
No, every state essentially already had abortion laws and they had their own ways of functioning.
It's always been an issue, an ethical issue.
But in 2022, and no one ever thought that this would ever happen.
I for sure, I was thinking this is never going to be overturned.
And the reason why I thought it was never going to be overturned is because the way
the federal court system would work is it goes by precedent.
(04:20):
So if it is deciding something new, they're going to put into a big account what has been
decided before on an issue like it.
And there's been tons of times when there was opportunities for Roe v. Wade to be overturned.
And it didn't.
Because Roe v. Wade was the precedent.
Because it was the precedent, it became the precedent and then a bunch of even Supreme
courts that had a lot of conservative judges on it.
Still upheld.
(04:41):
They still upheld it.
And so it was just like, that's not going to be overturned.
But that was the goal of a bunch of Christians and evangelicals in this scenario is if we
can get enough conservative judges and we know their stance on Roe, then if a thing comes
up there, they can overturn it.
They have the power to do it.
So we just have to make sure that that happens.
And so that was a major point for conservatives electing a Republican president that was
(05:04):
against get your judges in there.
And then eventually enough, we'll have a majority in the lower term.
And so during the Trump presidency, he had the opportunity to nominate and put in three
different judges appointing to the Supreme Court.
Especially Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett, which just sidebar,
she comes from a charismatic background.
(05:26):
So that's pretty interesting.
And they were all like, he knew their position on abortion beforehand.
And so putting it in there seemed like a major win.
And just so happened, what was inexplicable did happen.
A case came up that could overturn Roe's weight and it was overturned finally 2022.
And it was a crazy landmark decision.
And a lot of people have been reeling ever since, like not knowing how to take it in
(05:47):
different ways.
It's been over 40 years.
And so essentially what happened is now it's back to the states to decide what their abortion
laws will be.
They don't have to make a federal mandate that they have to allow abortions.
So some states are still totally lax on their decisions like our state in California.
And then other states are very, very restrictive.
(06:09):
We've got straight up bans.
14 states now have a total abortion ban.
And then other states have more restrictive stuff.
See what happened was, and this is kind of crazy, the number of abortions actually went
up.
So from the 80s, there was roughly 1.6 million or so abortions happening 80s and 90s.
And then ever since then it was steadily declining.
(06:31):
There was a bunch of sociological reasons why it was steadily declining, but it was.
Then after the overturn of Roe's weight, it popped up and it was already starting to rise
slightly and then it rose even more.
And just what happened was the states that had lax laws, women went to them to get abortions.
There's been a lot of traveling for abortions.
(06:52):
And even in the US News and World Report, they released in January numbers that infant
deaths are higher, actually higher in states where there are total abortion bans.
So there's actually been higher numbers since Roe's weight was overturned.
So it's pretty wild and definitely a gray issue.
Now I will say, before we get into the philosophical arguments, I am, I don't like using the
(07:14):
super highly politicized terms, pro life, pro choice.
But if I were to, it would be pro life, but it would need to be nuanced in a way that
you're understanding like, what does that actually mean?
And we're going to talk about that a little bit more, but just so.
Just to say right off the bat, this isn't a pro abortion discussion.
It's just, we want to have a fair dialogue about how difficult this issue actually is.
(07:40):
So first let's talk about some of the arguments.
So these are philosophical arguments and some of them, they can be super reductionistic
and ridiculous.
But they're the kind of things that.
But these have been argued at some point or another.
So the main obvious one against abortion is killing people is wrong.
There's an obvious assumption there.
This is how it goes.
Killing innocent human beings is wrong.
(08:00):
The life of a human begins at conception.
So that is a key that not everyone agrees with.
That is true.
And that is.
Even some Christians don't necessarily agree with that.
And so that, and that's really, really significant point to how this argument falls.
So if, if that's the case, then the fetus is an instant human life, killing the fetus
is wrong.
Therefore, and they'll say, why is a fetus a person and not like a group of cells or
(08:24):
something like that?
Well, it has a unique genetic code already.
And so it's an individual.
Now obviously when we have a situation where a conception just happens, logically people
wouldn't be like, that's a human being, but we know that it potentially is or like it
will become one.
Like it's not like it's going to become something different.
(08:47):
Like well fetuses aren't even viable until a certain amount of time.
So it's like it actually could not live on its own.
Right.
But like if you see a seed, a mustard seed just kind of leaves a biblical reference.
If you look at it and you said that's a tree, it is not a tree.
It's not a tree.
It has the potential to be a tree.
Has the potential to be a tree.
And also like not the potential to be anything else.
Like it's gonna, like if you plan it and it could be.
(09:07):
But yes, it will be a tree.
It's not going to become grass or a shrub.
Right.
It'll be a tree.
But that's kind of the issue.
Some people say, but it's not a tree.
And unless you plant it and grow it and all that kind of stuff, it won't become a tree.
It's a seed.
And but then the other argument will say, but it will, that's the only thing it can
become and the natural way of it.
(09:28):
It's already been fertilized.
It's already been put in.
It's like, it's like putting that seed in the ground and then and then and already
planting it, that's what we're saying is already a tree if it's in process, right?
Especially with Christians, who can, we can point to verses and like Psalms and stuff
where it's like, you know, like you knit me together and my mother's word.
There's a very like, very, very strong sense of like the personhood of a fetus in that
(09:50):
sense because of especially language and verbatues to cross scripture.
Right.
But this is the real issue.
This is like, like there's other things that we're going to talk about, but the real underlying
issue is when does human life start because that's literally it because if you're just
removing something from your own body, then that is not an abortion.
But if you're removing another person, then that is.
(10:13):
And so some folks will say, this isn't a person.
It's like a seed.
It's a, it's a possibility of a person.
It's a person in a certain situation.
It will become a person, but it isn't one.
So terminating that is not terminating life.
It's terminating a possibility.
Yeah.
The potential for life.
Which is, which is different.
So fundamentally, if you do not believe that a fetus at a certain age is not a person,
(10:36):
then an abortion is not ethically wrong.
Because you're not, you're not changing anything.
That's like cutting your hair or like, and I know that sounds like obviously it's not
the same people will be, that's egregious to say that.
But if it's a part of your body that you're,
Are like appendicitis.
You go in and you cut the appendix out.
Right.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Anything like that.
(10:56):
And then some people will be like, no, well, it has a DNA of a person, but like, and this
is where the arguments can get ridiculous.
But like, let's say I lose my finger, my fingers on the ground.
Right.
That has my DNA.
Yeah.
But that's not a person.
Yeah.
It's not going to regrow a you.
It's not going to regrow me.
But they'll say, but that DNA does grow into a you.
You don't say so.
I think this is one of those conversations that everyone has a different, has a different
(11:21):
like starting point.
We never agree on terms.
No one agrees on when things are happening.
That's the biggest problem though.
So we're all talking past each other about a different argument because it, if you're
in an argument, if you have a pro life view of life beginning at conception, you're arguing
with someone who doesn't believe that life begins at conception, then they're actually
fundamentally just different arguments.
They're fundamentally different arguments.
And so like that's, that's kind of the beginning of it.
I'm not saying that you should change your view because I believe that human life happens
(11:44):
at conception, but I can understand why a person doesn't.
If they have like that view of like, there's a potentiality there and stuff.
And then at least I will become more gracious towards that other view.
I won't necessarily call that person a murderer.
Correct.
You know what I mean?
And that's, that's a big deal.
Yeah.
Right?
I would agree.
So anyways, some other arguments, you know, killing potential people is wrong because
(12:07):
it would be wrong to ruin a person's potential.
You know, killing beings with a future like ours is wrong.
This person can have a future like ours.
Causing pain is wrong in general, causing pain and a fetus is sufficiently developed
to feel pain by 18 weeks.
So anybody that has an abortion, they will feel pain.
And then, so those are kind of like regular ones that you'll hear.
Another interesting one is increasing the tolerance of killing is wrong on a societal
(12:30):
level.
Like desensitizing to, to the loss of human life, I guess they would say.
And so like allowing abortion is legalizing killing, even if we're not talking about murder,
it is killing of some sort of life.
And so it reduces a person's respect for life, reduces society's respect for life.
This is generally a bad thing.
And I think that's actually, that has some power in, in ethics of life.
(12:53):
Yeah, that has a merit.
Absolutely.
Yeah.
So that argument.
So those are kind of like the two arguments that are strong on that side, I think.
So the arguments for abortion, and these are not just, they're not typically for abortions
in general.
They're for abortions in selected cases.
Yeah.
I have a hard time when people say like pro-choices being pro-abortion because I don't think anyone
gets pregnant to get an abortion.
Like that's never like a woman is like, ooh, I'm gonna get pregnant just so I can kill
(13:17):
it.
You know, like that's, that's not actually the conversation.
And that I feel like is almost what, what happened is these like demonizing women as
if they plot and scheme to get pregnant just so that they can terminate their pregnancy.
You know, sometimes you may see like in a protest, somebody having a sign that's flippant
like that.
Yeah.
And that's terrible.
And that's, those should not happen.
(13:38):
Agreed.
Because the, the actual choice that a woman makes is a very difficult choice.
Yes.
That's very personal for women.
100%.
It's, it's not this flippant little desire thing, typically, right?
Typically, right.
So one is, and we kind of talked about this, the fetus is not necessarily a person.
It's not a person with the right to live.
So a collection of human cells does not have the right to live just because it is of the
human species.
Like that's the argument for amputating a limb.
(14:01):
You know, you know, collection of human cells only has a right to live by virtue of a few
different facts.
One, it may be a reached a particular state of development that makes it a moral person.
Yeah.
And then, or it possesses certain properties that make it a moral person.
The problem with calling it a moral person is like even a baby that's been born is not
moral.
(14:21):
Yeah.
You know what I mean?
If you think of any theology of we're all fallen people, then actually technically.
That baby ain't no altruist.
No.
Baby ain't no altruist.
Selfish.
We're all, as we all are.
The little baby is an egoist.
Oh.
That's what it is.
That's what it is.
All cares about is eating.
Calling your local baby an egoist.
But yeah.
(14:42):
So even if you take out the idea of a moral person, they might say like a rational person
or a thinking person or, or some of that cognitive person, some of that.
Another argument, it is not always wrong to end a life of an innocent person.
Now that sounds interesting, but there are some very specific cases where that's the
case.
So there's cases where you have to choose between two innocent people.
(15:04):
For example, a conjoined twins, like where they'll both die.
Right.
And, but you have to choose which person to live.
That's very, very difficult.
Mountaineering.
This is like so specific.
Yeah.
It's a, you know, when a person can only save their own life by cutting the rope of someone
who's fallen.
I always think of a, did you watch Ace Matero too?
No.
When the greatest movies.
(15:25):
Yeah, you're a fan of that.
Yeah.
It's so funny.
But in the beginning, he's like mountaineering and he has like a little raccoon and he has
to cut the rope of the raccoon.
Yeah.
Raccoon's dying.
It's all dramatic.
It's so good.
Anyways, this one is crucial and talked about a lot, but the case of a woman who might die
if there isn't an abortion.
(15:45):
And so I think a lot of pro life people will rebuttal that and be like, that isn't the
same thing.
I mean, it is technically right.
They would have an abortion.
So technically it's the same thing.
But the difference there is you're not choosing to terminate the life as just a general choice.
You're having to make the decision between two lives, which is a terrible decision anybody
(16:06):
would be put into.
Yeah.
Absolutely.
And so, and so that's just a, you know, that's, but it's a different scenario.
And then this, the big one too that you'll hear a lot of times is the pregnant woman
has moral rights, has, has her own rights, reproductive rights.
Under some circumstances, these rights might override the fetus's right to live.
(16:28):
And so what might it be?
The right of ownership of her own body, the right to decide her own future, the right
to take decisions without moral or legal intervention by others.
And the pregnant woman has a right to life.
So not aborting the fetus would put the mother's life in danger.
So that one's a little bit different here, but like the other things here that we talked
(16:49):
about, right to her own body.
The question is here, does that right negate the right of the unborn child?
Well, if you think of the fetus as an unborn child, like a human being, then pro-life advocates
would say, no, it doesn't because that's a human person.
So the right to have ownership of your own body is true except for the fact that you're
(17:11):
dealing with another person's body, right?
But if you do not view that as another person, then it's not the same.
Then it's not the same.
Then it's just you having the right to do things with your own body.
So you see this a fundamental difference philosophically and it tends to hinge on where everyone's
coming from, when everybody's coming from your view of when life starts as a human, when
(17:33):
it's human life start.
Those are the arguments.
What do you think, how do you think about those?
Do you know of any other arguments?
Is that generally what we hear?
I mean, those are probably the big ones, especially then you get really nuanced and you're like,
well, if a girl is raped or something and then they get pregnant and they're like under
age or something and it's like, well, that kind of blanket banning or this kind of whatever
(17:54):
like actually really puts somebody else in danger.
So I think that there's really nuance.
There's just always going to be situations on both sides of the coin.
I also do think that like these conversations are very gloss over other things like IVF
where you're like, oh, well, if you're doing like, if life starts at conception and all
them little homies in the Petri dish, when Christians are doing IVF are technically
(18:17):
people.
So then are you very comfortable?
So it's like, there's elements of all of it that if you keep going down the line, it's
just not as easy as saying one or the other.
There is a Catholic ethics that will not allow for any contraceptions at all because of that
very reason.
Like they'll trace it all the way back to that.
So it's like, I think it's just one of those situations that if you follow them all the
(18:39):
way out either way, it's just never as simple as being like, I'm always this or I'm always
that.
And so I think that that's what, if anything from all of these different pro and against
arguments, like you kind of have to see that it's never as easy as always and never.
It's never like, oh, I'm always, I'm always going to be anti-borscht on it.
And it's like, oh, it's until it's your person, you know, like until it's your daughter or
(19:01):
it's somebody who like is in danger for their life or something like that.
You know, like it's just very easy when it's not like to have these opinions and these
thoughts when you're outside of it.
But I also think that all of these conversations, like we have to be really inviting Jesus into
them.
Like we have to really, really invite Jesus into these spaces where it's like, okay, like
I know a lot of Christians who are like, well, it's not worth aborting if the like
(19:22):
woman's life is at danger because what if God heals them?
You know, like those kinds of conversations.
And so it's just never as easy as I'm always against abortion or I'm never, you know,
which should put us to pause on being too judgmental on this thing.
Immediately.
That's the number one.
Even if you hold positions like, like you and I do, we just can't be judgmental towards
(19:43):
people because it is much more complicated than that.
So one thing that I think a lot of pro-life folks will typically agree to is the exceptions
of an abortion being rape, incest, or the death of the mother, like potential death
of the mother, at least that last one virtually everyone agrees with.
Like when you make that decision, you have to choose one or the other.
(20:06):
And they usually choose, sometimes you hear different arguments, but like typically the
life of the mother is prioritized over the life of the unborn child.
Reason being, I can speak, like if that was the situation with my wife, Connie has already
affected many lives.
Whereas the unborn child hasn't.
And that's a tragedy either way.
But I would choose my wife.
Right.
I know a lot of husbands who when they're put in situations, even when their wife is
(20:28):
giving birth have had to be in situations where it's like, this is not going well.
Who are we saving?
And that's usually what people will say.
And you know, it's hard to judge either way.
Now the rape and incest one, I've heard lots of people push back on that.
And so for example, with a rape, they say that's not the woman's choice ever to have
the child.
And it's completely utterly unfair to her.
(20:48):
And the pushback will be totally is unfair.
But it's also unfair for the child to lose her life because who was actually unfair was
a rapist.
It was a person who caused that.
And that person should be penalized, but not the child.
Very rarely are.
And so that's a, so you hear a pushback on that too.
So like, and then you can get into like, what if there was rape when the child was under
(21:11):
age and all sorts of stuff like that.
And like just very hairy, complicated issues that if, if, if you were in that situation
or some of you love was in that situation, it'd just be a very different story.
And so the best advice there is before you go judge on somebody else, try to make that
situation personal and then see how you respond.
Cause I think we would all be very, have very different responses if we either personally
(21:34):
experienced it or someone that we cared about and loved was personally experiencing it.
At least your approach would be more gracious.
A little more, a little more gracious, which kind of speaks then to the, the damage unfortunately
that Christians or pro-life, you know, advocates have done in these kinds of protests as they
give about abortion, especially with like the use of the terminology, like calling women
(21:56):
murderers when they've had an abortion, but you don't know necessarily why they've had
an abortion.
Like that just never happened.
Like, I mean, that should just never happen.
Ever.
Like I'm so sorry.
Like if one take away, don't call anyone a murder, that's like, that's just so devastating,
especially for a woman in that position.
Like they're probably like, you get to that point with a lot of pain and there's a lot
(22:19):
of decisions and thoughts that have gone into that.
And then for someone in such a like very vulnerable state, maybe like, you're a murder.
Like that is really hard.
And I think it's done a lot of damage for the Christian conversation about this topic
because people feel like, Oh, well Christians are anti me, anti woman, anti mom who had
to get an abortion.
(22:39):
We talked about in our first episode of this season, um, that's kind of the Christians
are mean.
Like there's no grace there is no love there towards somebody.
Even if, even if you think what they did was wrong, there's still no love or grace towards
that person who made a difficult decision that wasn't easy for him.
Absolutely.
And that's been, I think I've done a lot of damage with Christians engaging in this conversation,
which I think is what we're trying to do here is reengage in a way that is biblical,
(23:04):
but also ministerial and meets people where they're at and has grace and has compassion
and empathy for a situation that would be devastating for any of us to be in.
Cause we have to reframe it.
Like this is not a protest.
This is a, like we have to engage in this and not make moms who had an abortion feel
like they can't go to church or feel like they can't talk with us or that they're less
(23:25):
than us because of decisions that they've had to come to at some point in their lives.
And it's a, it's a decision that's also over.
Right?
Like so.
Like no coming back from that.
So, you know, to, to bring psychological damage to someone that already has dealt with very
difficult things.
I don't see how, how it can possibly be helpful.
Yeah.
(23:45):
Yeah.
So one thing that I think is really important and an argument that is, is given against
people who are pro-life is that they're not really pro-life.
They're pro-birth because after the baby's born, they don't really help with any rights
on anything else.
And so that argument, I think it doesn't get to the heart of the abortion argument, whether
(24:09):
where life starts, but what it does do is it calls out a double standard that Christians
are functioning under.
And so Christians believe or they, they root this idea of pro-life, they should anyways,
under a general ethics of life that is rooted in scripture.
God is life.
God is existence itself.
All things are drawn into existence from God to use kind of like this paul tillic terms.
(24:33):
You know, life is drawn from the source of life, the giver of life, the spirit is life.
Adam and Eve had the tree of knowledge of good and evil and tree of life.
And then if you ate from the tree of life, you would live.
You would have everlasting life.
These are, these are concepts that are not like insignificant or small, but heavily rooted
scripturally and should be a part of every Christians ethics.
(24:54):
And if that is the case, then you would think that they would generally have a disposition
against abortions, at least in a flippant way, but you can have a nuanced understanding
of like the difficulty of the decision, but still have a general sense of like, we're
going to be for the things that produce life, the things that give life.
And so that argument, I think is pretty dang important.
(25:16):
I would agree.
Hey, you're going to, you're going to put these Christians on blast for saying that
they are for life, you know, advocates of an ethics of life, but then at the same time,
you're not going to help women with healthcare.
You're not going to help them with childcare, with the kids education.
You're not going to help walk with women through pregnancy.
You're not going to help them see a future that's possible if they kept the child.
(25:41):
Yeah.
You're not going to reform the foster care system.
You're not going to help give them more maternity leave.
You're not going to help.
And then we love your kid.
We love your baby until it's a person of color, until it's LGBTQ plus, until it's all these
things.
And then you get, you're born and then we immediately don't like you or we immediately
have an issue with you.
(26:01):
And that's the double standard.
And that's the double standard that we have here.
The thing is, if you have an ethics of life, then what we should be looking for is instead
of talking about pro-life in that way, maybe we should talk about just like the basic ethics
term that we're talking about human flourishing.
Yeah.
Right?
Like that's the reason why we believe in this ethics of life is for humans to flourish.
And we do live the good life for human flourishing.
(26:23):
So what are the things that can help a human flourish?
And if it is the woman go into term, but finding a way of living that won't destroy her future
and you can show that she can flourish, I think you're going to be able to reduce abortions
on a much greater scale than any law can do.
Yeah, I would agree.
(26:43):
I want there to be less abortions because I'm pro-life.
I want there to be drastically and significantly less abortions.
What is the best way to do it?
How can you reduce abortions?
And that's a different question than should we overturn Rover's weight or make laws more
restrictive for women and stuff like that?
Yeah.
If you just peel everything back and you look at the ethics of life, then you're going to
(27:05):
be like, okay, this 17-year-old girl that had a baby, she made mistakes, whatever.
Like literally, who cares?
You do not have to think about the reason why someone is giving birth.
That's not even...
Yeah, it's not important.
It's not important.
Think about what's going to happen.
Yeah.
That young girl is going to bring a human life into the world and you want her to bring
(27:28):
the human life.
You want her to be a good mother and you want the child to grow up in a good environment,
in a country that cares for everybody involved.
Yeah.
Right?
So make that happen.
Make that happen.
Make it so that way that young girl can still have a career, have a job, still be able to
do stuff.
(27:49):
Make the pathways for human flourishing to happen for both the baby and the woman.
And you know what you're doing?
You're helping an American citizen thrive.
Yes.
Is it not something our government should do?
It is definitely something our government should do.
Kind of crazy.
Yeah.
I mean, even as we get up into these political...
Like we're not here to change anybody's votes or anything, but I think it's important
to consider that if you're only voting for a candidate because they're anti-abortion,
(28:11):
but they're also not pro reform of healthcare, they're not pro reforming the adoption and
foster care system.
If they're not pro any of that, then is this a false sense of security?
Are you saying, oh, well, at least I know that they're not for abortion.
But are they for life?
Like are they actually pro-life?
If you take the idea of just having ethics of life and just like actually...
(28:35):
So what you're supposed to do philosophically, you're supposed to look at an argument and
look at its explanatory power.
How much can it actually explain?
And does it explain a lot of different things?
And then it's a good argument.
We're going to see if it's reasoned well, if it's clear, but we also have to see if
it's consistent, if it's coherent, and if it's comprehensive, those three things are
(28:56):
crucial.
So like if you believe something, but you don't consistently hold it, then do you actually
believe it?
You're just actually giving a one-off.
You're giving some evidence for some various belief, but your actual beliefs are something
different.
So if you hold to an ethics of life, what should your views of war be?
What should your views of capital punishment be?
(29:17):
What should your views of gun violence be?
What should those views, if you're talking about human flourishing, about life because
God is life and all of our lives exist in him, right?
So if you become a single issue voter and you are against abortion, but you are for
war and capital punishment, all these other things, I was for capital punishment.
(29:39):
I was a youth pastor and this kid, he was like 14 or 15 or something.
And I was like, you know, capital punishment makes sense because it's fair.
Like if somebody murders somebody, then you know, like eye for an eye, they should, that's
what's there.
And then he was like, he just so quickly said, he's like, but if you murder them, then they
can't be saved.
(30:01):
And then I was just like, oh man, that's like super duper right.
Oh, that's good.
Do you take out the possibility for this guy to be redeemed?
It made me rethink everything there, you know, and just like, and like it was inconsistent
with my idea of life of like, so I'm no longer for capital punishment, life imprisonment
for show.
Show a minute.
And if we're going to be pro-life, then let's work on being Christians who have care groups
(30:25):
in their churches for moms who've been through abortions, who let's think about how to provide
daycare for young moms who've had kids and can't afford to put their kid in daycare because
it's mad expensive, or let's figure out how to find out what local resources in our area
can help, like what's your local pregnancy center, like how can we come around instead
of being mean and against it, if we're going to be pro-life, then let's figure out how
(30:49):
to practically put our boots on the ground and not just vote for our morals.
But how do we as Christians, as believers come around and support the people who've actually
and genuinely gone through these things?
How can you be really pro-life?
Yeah.
How can we be really and genuinely pro-life?
How can we take these young moms kids to school?
Can we help bring them meals when we know that they're struggling?
(31:10):
Can we raise money and help them buy supplies or whatever?
How can we support the women and the kids and the fathers who've gone through this kind
of stuff?
Let's put our money where our mouth is and not just vote politically, but how do we actually
live a pro-life life?
And recognize too that it's not forever.
(31:31):
It's not like a woman that had a baby and was considering abortion, but now is being
helped by the church.
They're not going to be infants forever.
These kids are going to grow up.
If you are a church that's loving and kind towards this whole family, guess what?
That is a witness that goes beyond that family.
So not only are you not on the hook forever to care for this child, but if you do properly
(31:52):
care for this child and his family and love them.
That is more powerful of a witness than standing outside an abortion clinic with a sign.
Much more powerful.
And it's actually doing the work that Christ has called us to do because He calls us to
be for the orphans and the widows.
Maybe we just put in the same thing, single mothers who had an abortion.
Love them, care for them, help them.
Don't think that it was right to have an abortion.
(32:12):
You don't have to.
You don't have to and we don't.
But you can still love them and help them and dignify them as human beings and be the
church to them and for them.
All right.
It's good.
Well, hopefully that discussion, I don't know if it brings clarity or for it muddies
things up more, but I think that's kind of the nature of it.
Right?
Like it's a difficult conversation.
And these are conversations worth having.
Worth having though.
(32:33):
All right.
Well, this was brought to you by the School of Theology and Ministry.
We'll see you guys next time.
Bye.
Popular Podcasts
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.