God Loves You

If you’ve had an abortion, God loves you. If you’re “pro-choice”, God loves you. If you’re “pro-life”, God loves you.

Yesterday, the nationally protected right to have an abortion was removed by the U.S. Supreme Court decision, Dobbs, State Health Officer of the Mississippi Department of Health, et al. v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization et al. which explicitly overrules the precedents of Roe and Casey.

There are different ways to discuss the political issue of abortion. Most organized efforts impose a lens of simplicity on the issue: “pro-life” versus “pro-choice”. Those are marketing terms meant to draw the public to a side, often for support, funding, and votes used for this issue and other issues unrelated to abortion. The efforts to impose simplicity on the issue of abortion effectively force each of the aforementioned sides to argue “anti-abortion” versus “pro-abortion” respectively.

The dialogue, if you want to call it that, often settles into a groove of argumentation surrounding the question, “When does human life begin?” This is a philosophical question, or at least one that necessarily depends on philosophical reasoning. Because that necessary reasoning is philosophically dependent, it will not be settled; such is the nature of all philosophical discourse. What can be settled relates to pragmatics and from there to politics. Rather than being an issue of simplicity, the issue of abortion is fraught with nuance. The political issue is multi-faceted and this will not be a comprehensive treatment of it.

Let’s look at this one way:

Does the government have a right to impose the philosophical preference of a particular religion (or sect(s) of a religion) on everyone else? The phrasing, even of that question, is philosophical. So, let’s rephrase the question. What happens when the government forces everyone to comply with the philosophical preference of a particular religion? That has the effect of imposing religious practice, permissive or prohibitive, on the population. This seems to run counter to the spirit of the First Amendment’s apparent intent to separate the government from the cause of religion.

Let’s look at this another way:

Prohibiting a doctor to intervene to save the life of a woman who has been diagnosed with an ectopic pregnancy, is ludicrous and cruel. For those of you not familiar with the term, an ectopic pregnancy is one in which the fertilized egg implants outside of the uterus, such as when it implants in the fallopian tube. This can cause internal bleeding and death of the woman, absent prompt medical intervention.

Forcing a woman to carry a stillborn or miscarried embryo or fetus to term, because medical intervention is conflated with abortion is cruel.

Forcing a woman retain pregnancy and give birth to a child of the man who sexually assaulted her or otherwise forced pregnancy upon her and, in some states, to be legally tied to that abuser after birth is cruel.

These are just a few scenarios that a ban on abortion forces. Furthermore, while I use the term woman in this writing to generically refer to anyone with female reproductive systems, young girls (long from being considered an adult) could be substituted into any scenario above, increasing the cruelty.

There is simply too much to unpack, especially in this format, and especially from a man. I am lending my voice to this solely in solidarity for women for whom the latest ruling disproportionately and adversely impacts: women, including and especially those “on the margins”, without the means (including travel) to obtain safe healthcare, and without the means to survive and thrive through pregnancy and with a child that results from it.

The world is not the same as it was 50 years ago when Roe v. Wade was decided. The world will continue to change.

Something that should not change: the government should protect a woman’s right to health and safety. Individuals should be free to make their own choices regardless of the religious preference of others.

For those who seek to follow Christ: using power over others in order to force their conformity to your religious view is antithetical to the call to follow Christ.

For those of you who question my faith for not siding with your single-issue view of American politics, check yourself for beams before coming after my mote. I’m available for respectful conversation. You know how to get a hold of me. God loves you.