Get a free copy of Parental Rights & Education when you subscribe to our newsletter!
“Although progressive ‘Christians’ cannot biblically square the monstrosity that is abortion with man as the Imago Dei, they don’t want to give up their love affair with Statism, wherein they interpret every biblical admonition to help the poor through the lens of coercive state action into the private sector.”
–JASON MATTERA
Every presidential cycle the public is subjected to an array of mind-boggling inanity from idealogues shilling for their preferred candidate. These ideologues will say whatever they have to, no matter how absurd, to get their man (or woman) in the White House.
One of the clearest examples of this absurdity was when a cadre of high-profile evangelicals stepped forward in the 2020 presidential campaign to declare that, actually, Joe Biden was the “pro-life” choice for Christians.
“Pro-life Evangelicals for Biden” is what they called themselves.
This announcement was made despite Biden’s backing taxpayer financing of abortion or his party’s insistence to allow the gruesome procedure up until the moment of birth. Biden was the pro-life candidate, they said, because he was willing to address “poverty, racism, lack of health care and climate change” by pushing through a myriad of social programs and government subsidies.
Biden was “pro-life” in the holistic sense went the argument.
Of course, what we got from Biden’s “pro-life” spending sprees is jaw-dropping inflation that has weakened the economy and hit America’s working poor the hardest.
Perhaps that’s why “Pro-life Evangelicals for Biden” have deactivated their website?
However, there was another rationale given by these purported evangelicals to defend their support for a radically pro-abortion politician, and not surprisingly, it also included government welfare. They maintained that laws restricting abortions are only marginally pro-life because such laws don’t tackle the “root cause” of abortion, which they claimed was “poverty.”
Therefore, a truly “pro-life” administration in their eyes would expand the Welfare State further.
That’s how Richard Mouw — the former president of Fuller Theological Seminary — and the late Ron Sider recast the “pro-life” stance in launching “Pro-life Evangelicals for Biden”:
“The most common reason women give for abortions is the financial difficulty of another child. Knowing that, we appreciate the fact that a number of Democratic proposals would significantly alleviate that financial burden: accessible health services for all citizens, affordable childcare, a minimum wage that lifts workers out of poverty.”
Mouw and Sider aren’t the only ones pining for greater government control under the banner of fewer abortions. In fact, it’s been a common theme within progressive circles, one that is still surfacing today.
Recently, “VeggieTales” creator Phil Vischer stipulated on Twitter that Christians in good conscience can back abortionist politicians because a straight line can be drawn connecting redistributionist welfare schemes to fostering a culture of life:
“Typically more [abortions fall] under [Democrat] administrations, because of policies that help the poor and young women. Reducing abortion also happens by reducing demand, which [Democrat] policies have done.”
Notice the sleight of hand this crowd uses?
Although progressive “Christians” cannot biblically square the monstrosity that is abortion with man as the Imago Dei, they don’t want to give up their love affair with Statism, wherein they interpret every biblical admonition to help the poor through the lens of coercive state action into the private sector.
What to do?
Redefine their beloved Statism as the genuine pro-life position while accusing conservatives of building obstacles to the pro-life cause with our focus on originalist judges, limited government, and balanced budgets.
Become a Bernie Bro! It’s for the children!
When it comes to the specifics of Vischer’s argument — that liberal policies are more effective at combating abortion than conservative ones — it simply isn’t backed up by the data.
Michael J. New, an associate professor at Catholic University, has analyzed this assertion already, and he found that “there are no peer-reviewed studies which show that more funding for welfare, health care, or contraception programs will result in abortion rate reductions.” To the contrary, “there is a significant body of academic research which shows that a range of pro-life laws reduce abortion rates.”
What Vischer and company didn’t understand was that abortion has mostly been a state and local issue, regardless of who occupied the Oval Office. Any regulations imposed just had to adhere to a Roe framework.
In post-Roe America, though, the issue is now entirely under the domain of the state. States have total autonomy on how they choose to regulate abortion.
As such, there are several states enacting overdue pro-life protections for the unborn and there are several states removing virtually all restrictions on when a mother can terminate a pregnancy.
Not only does this contrast help Christians assess who really is in the business of defending innocent life, but it also helps us finally put to rest the specious talking point that social welfare, as opposed to legal prohibitions, curb the rate of abortion.
For a stark example, let’s review what’s underway in Texas.
Once the state’s “trigger law” outlawing abortion kicked in after the Dobbs decision, the number of abortions performed took a massive nosedive — and I do mean massive.
Here are the numbers: The Lone Star State logged 2,596 abortions in June 2022, 68 abortions in July, and only three — 3 (!) — abortions in August, which were all deemed “medically necessary.”
From June to August, that’s a whopping 99 percent drop.
That bears repeating: Abortion plunged by 99 percent in America’s second most populous state.
Why?
Because abortion is now a felony “punishable by up to life in prison” for a doctor who performs one and carries “at least a $100,000 fine for each offense.”
Texas is not alone in experiencing this sea change.
A national survey conducted by the Society of Family Planning found that there were “10,670 fewer abortions in the two months following the Dobbs decision, compared to pre-Dobbs estimates.” Oklahoma, for instance, recorded 510 abortions in April of 2022, but fewer than 10 abortions in June of 2022 after Dobbs was handed down.
It turns out that the best way to advance the pro-life movement is to ensure that our legal codes prevent babies from getting hacked to death while they’re in the womb.
Who would’ve thunk it?
Progressive Christians like Vischer will now have to go back to the drawing board and sketch out another preposterous “pro-life” excuse to justify their unbiblical romance with pilfering other people’s money in the name of Christ.
Follow Jason on Twitter! @JasonMattera
Ready to dive deeper into the intersection of faith and policy? Head over to our Theology of Politics series page where we’ve published several long-form pieces that will help Christians navigate where their faith should direct them on political issues.
