Sullivan church of Christ – Sullivan, MO
Date: June 7, 2009
“OPEN HEARTS. OPEN MINDS. FAIR-MINDED WORDS.”
Ben Justice
On May 17, 2009, the President, Barack Obama, delivered an address to the class of 2009 at Notre Dame. It didn’
t come without heated controversy. Many lined up outside of the college protesting the coming of the President.
There were a number of arrests, including former presidential candidate, Alan Keyes, who was actually put in jail
— not once but twice.
During the course of the President’s speech, he spent quite a bit of time addressing the abortion debate. I
believe most everyone knows that the President is “pro-choice,” believing that a woman should have the right to
chose to abort her baby. The President said,
. . . I do not suggest that the debate surrounding abortion can or should go away.
It is clear from reading this speech and hearing other things he has said in the past on the subject of abortion
that he is clearly conflicted on this issue. This article is certainly not intended to be a political evaluation of the
president, but to deal with one very important point — THE ABORTION DEBATE. I agree with the President that
the abortion debate should not go away. This debate should never be swept under the rug; it is truly a life and
death issue. Know this also: Someone is wrong! The President uttered another very true statement, when he
said,
Because no matter how much we may want to fudge it — indeed, while we know that the views of most Americans on the subject are
complex and even contradictory — the fact is that at some level, the views of the two camps are irreconcilable.
Indeed they are. Of course, the “two camps” that he references are the “pro-life” camp and the “pro-choice”
camp. The “pro-life” camp believes and contends that the life inside the mother’s body is precisely that — A
LIFE. And, not just any life — HUMAN LIFE! To willfully take that life constitutes murder.
The “pro-choice” camp believes and contends that it is a not a human, but just a disposable piece of tissue.
Therefore, it is not murder to eliminate (or abort) it.
Again, what did the President say? The contention of the pro-life camp and the contention of the pro-choice
camp are “irreconcilable.” In other words, either it is a human life or it isn’t a human life; it is either right or
wrong. The two camps are opposites. Since this is the case, then why is the opposite of “pro-life” referred to as
“pro-choice?” This is not accurate, for it should be “pro-death,” for this is the opposite of “pro-life.” One writer
wrote this:
What is the opposite of “pro-life?” It is not “pro-choice.” “Life” and “choice” are not opposites. It is “pro-death.” But the advocates of
abortion would not dare adopt that expression. It is too dramatic, too volatile, too loaded — too true! Such would be bad public
relations. So, with obvious obfuscation they take refuge behind the more socially acceptable “pro-choice.” This expression calls for
further amplification. “Choice” implies options; choice to do what? This is where the vocabulary slope becomes slippery. The choice is to
eliminate, eradicate, or terminate (Wayne Jackson, President Obama Calls for Debate on Abortion, “Christian Courier on the Web,”
www.christiancourier.com).
The President calls for a fair-minded debate on the abortion debate. Well, the fact is, this has been debated for
40 years; the evidence is undeniable that what is growing inside the body of a woman who is pregnant is a human
life. Of course, there are millions of people who don’t know that, or either they know it and simply refuse to
accept it. The President said that we need to “open up our hearts and our minds” about this issue. He explicitly
said, “Open hearts. Open minds. Fair-minded words.” Yes indeed, let’s have such a debate.
What exactly do pro-choice advocates believe they are aborting inside the mother’s womb? Is it just a blob of
tissue, or is it a human being? It is either non-human or human. It must be one or the other. So, let’s have a
fair minded debate about which one it is. Wouldn’t this be fair!
When a male sperm unites with a female egg, what is the result? Something happens for sure. If it continues
uninterrupted, in nine months, the mother will give birth to a human being. But, was it a human being all the
time while in the mother’s womb? Was it a human being when the male sperm united with the female egg? If it
wasn’t, then what was it? Remember, it is either human or non-human. Clearly, the entity inside the mother’s
womb is living from fertilization onward. Scientific evidence clearly shows that such is the case; it just can’t be
denied. Again, the question is whether it is human or not. Now, if it is non-human, but just a blob of tissue,
the debate is over. It can be terminated and aborted. After all, we take the lives of plants and animals, don’t
we? We use these things for the benefit of mankind. However, human life has always taken on a different
category, as indeed it should (cf. Gen. 1:26-27; Psalm 8:4-5). Those who are pro-choice, like the President is,
obviously believe that it is non-human and thus can be eliminated. But, what is the truth of the matter? The
truth is abundantly clear: “It” is a human life from conception onward. This is proven scientifically and biblically.
Here is something else the President stated in this speech:
So let us work together to reduce the number of women seeking abortions, let’s reduce unintended pregnancies.
Now, let’s get this straight. The President is pro-choice, obviously believing the “thing” growing in the mother’s
womb is not human and thus to eliminate it doesn’t amount to murder, but then turns right around and says
that we should “work together to reduce the number of women seeking abortions.” I ask, “Why?” It makes no
logical sense to work to reduce the number of abortions, while at the same time believing that the entity growing
inside the mother’s womb is not human. Go figure.
Here is the deal: Those who are die-hard pro-choice would had rather choose death than choose life. These are
pagan people. They seem to be intoxicated on murder. No matter what the evidence shows, they will never
change their minds; they are anti-God, anti-Bible, and anti-morality. But, those who want to honestly have an
open minded debate with fair words can perhaps be reached. We hope so, and thus, the abortion debate should
never end. I wonder if the President is truly interested in having a fair-minded debate with open hearts and open
minds? Time will tell.