A Christian Response

by Jojo Ruba

A few months ago, I wrote a post on my Facebook commenting on Martin Luther King Jr’s courage. In response, a friend pointed out that MLK was deeply flawed. Stories of his infidelity and plagiarism have come out in recent years. He also spoke at a Planned Parenthood dinner, something those of us fighting for the rights of the pre-born find deeply problematic. But Pastor King’s (King was a Baptist pastor) flaws don’t change the fact that he spoke the truth when he fought and gave his life for the legal rights of African-Americans.

I couldn’t help but think of King, as I read a blog post by another Baptist pastor critical of pro-lifers. Pastor Mike Engbers of Edmonton explains why he feels the abortion debate should not be reopened because of pro-lifers’ bad character. He explains how pro-lifers’ focus on laws protecting the pre-born, distract from the compassion Christians should show to hurting people. But Pastor Mike’s self-admitted “generalizations” underscore the kind of misunderstanding many Christians have about the abortion debate.

Why we have laws

The first problem in Pastor Mike’s analysis of the pro-life movement is his flawed understanding of the law and morality. Despite the prime minister insisting on not even debating abortion, Pastor Mike blames the re-opening of the debate to the election of a Conservative majority government. He adds this is problematic because “people seem to feel that morality hinges on the legality of the issue at hand.” Why? Because he says, “Allowing government legislation to be the tool by which we communicate our ethics is disconcerting to me.”

I agree that the law can’t be our main focus now. That’s why our organization’s primary goal is educational not political. We understand that the law can only be changed if we first change the hearts and minds of Canadians.

But Pastor Mike’s argument begs the question: what then should government legislation communicate? Can we create laws that are value-neutral? Of course not.  All laws force someone’s morality on someone else. For example, when the Alberta government passed a law on distracted driving, it did so because it took a stand that using a cell phone while driving is dangerous to human lives and is therefore wrong.  Moreover, that’s a moral view that the government clearly has a right to impose on those who disagree. Pastor Mike himself attacks pro-lifers for not speaking out against modern slavery.  But much of that work involves creating laws banning slavery, laws that would be “government legislation” used as a “tool by which we communicate our ethics.”

In comparison to this muddled thinking, Pastor King said “It may be true that the law cannot make a man love me; religion and education will have to do that. But if it keeps him from lynching me, and I think that's pretty important also.” He understood that though the law can’t make people become Christians, it can ensure people aren’t unjustly killed – a Christian virtue.

A moral problem

Pastor Mike’s also doesn’t identify the right problem in the abortion debate. He says pro-lifers should provide more services to pregnant women and compassion to those who are born.  But in fact, if Pastor Mike looks at the number of services available to women with unwanted pregnancies, as we have he would know that there are already dozens of pro-life centres across the country. Despite their good work though, too few women are going to these centres.  In 2007, the network of pregnancy centres, CAPPS, helped 6374 women of which, 1074 were “abortion-minded” or “abortion-vulnerable.”  In the same year, over 100 000 Canadians chose abortion – most of whom had never visited these centres.  The greatest need then is not to establish more centres but to ensure that the ones created are well used.

But why aren’t these centres used? Most Canadians, Christian or not, know that regardless of the situation they face, that they should never harm their born children. The fact that they would kill their pre-born children means that they don’t actually value them the same way as the born. In other words, abortion happens because of a knowledge/moral problem, not a service one. Pastor Mike’s article arguments suffer the same problem.

Who does abortion kill?

For example, he distinguishes between the law not “mandating” abortion vs making it simply legal for people to choose.  Of course he would never make the same distinction about slavery – he knows it is unjust as long as it happens, regardless of whether or not people are “mandated” to own a slave.

Moreover, if Pastor Mike truly believed that abortion kills pre-born humans who are just as valuable as born people, he would not advocate for silencing the abortion debate until pro-lifers speak out on other issues. He would understand the urgency.  Instead, he writes that pro-lifers have no credibility to speak about the lives of pre-born people because they don’t speak out against human trafficking, the rights of women and their children in other countries, modern slavery and even miscarriages. But we don’t question the credibility of The Canadian Cancer Society or Mothers Against Drunk Driving just because they don’t fight modern slavery or childhood obesity. We recognize their unique role and wouldn’t question their commitment to human life just because of their specific responsibilities.  Even Pastor Mike’s own church supports particular projects. In the same way that we don’t dismiss the truth that Pastor King spoke just because he did wrong, we shouldn’t dismiss the truth that pro-lifers speak even if we don’t like their attitude.

I don’t say any of this as Pastor Mike’s enemy. I say this as someone who deeply loves his church and the Kingdom we are supposed to represent. I just pray that we extend the same grace to the little children who are killed in our own neighbourhoods, daily, as he does to those who are born. As Martin Luther King Jr. said when he talked about the white churches who ignored the plight of African-Americans:

"In deep disappointment I have wept over the laxity of the church. But be assured that my tears have been tears of love. There can be no deep disappointment where there is not deep love…Yes, I see the church as the body of Christ. But, oh! How we have blemished and scarred that body through social neglect and through fear of being nonconformists."