Christianity’s Ineffectual Impact Upon Abortion

(A Secular Conservative Surveys the Abortion Question)

Brian Worley



The Christian churches are great at pretenses! While they lead the “parade” against abortion…it is merely a charade to mask the ugliness of what the numbers tell us. It seems that Christianity’s “best minds upon the frontlines” are interested in posturing and the defense of the faith but lack the prescience to form strategies to make a difference in society. Yet, these people get paid and the fact remains that Christians abort more babies than any other group!  

While Christian & Conservative leadership is mesmerized with paycheck & faith retention, our society is rotting. The salt has lost its preservative demeanor! Nothing will change since Conservative groups are almost always led by religious people. We must take inventory and figure things out! We can’t keep doing what we (Conservatives) have been doing and expect different results…this is the essence of insanity! So much can be done!  

Why is this writer so pessimistic? Frankly, a person of faith hasn’t figured this out because: 1) they haven’t yet in all this time 2) it cannot be done with a faith blueprint! Let’s be frank here, Conservative and Christian viewpoints have perpetually lost ground to the progressive’s, liberals or whatever else you wish to call them. This writer has lost patience with these groups because they are leading us to obsolescence.  

The Christian worldview has inherent blinders built in. They live in a world of faith projections and fantasy. Faith identity without proper grounding which leads to beggars looking for benefits rather than conscious souls partaking and seeking ways to give back as Jesus’ example taught! Sidetracked by eschatology such as Postmillennialism or worse yet, Premillennialism (let Jesus clean it up…while they sit on their duff because it is inevitable).  

Abortion shouldn’t happen in a community of faith!

Did you know that abortion is the #1 killer in America? Before we get into this, you must realize the following:  

It was an Anglican clergyman, a graduate of Jesus College, Thomas Malthus whose body of work that led to the eugenics movement, which in time led to legalized abortion. Abortion is about de-population. First the concept of man being an animal (rather than a human being) needs to be readily accepted and then a different type of minister (clergyman) to help the participants to accept and then mentally navigate the repercussions of the deed. To have reached this point, it took a relentless assault upon spirituality and a whole lot of filthy lucre to bring this about.  

Well over 90% of abortions are elective abortions, they are not due to the health of baby or mother, nor rape or incest. The decision is a response to make “a problem” to go away by killing. At the time of writing, we are at over 61 million abortions in the US since Roe v. Wade (see abortion clock). For perspective, sixty-one million is over 18% of the US population (about equal to the population of California & Florida). Not only is abortion a moral catastrophe, it also has economic repercussions (the Social Security Trust Fund now has far less contributors than the original plan budgeted).  

Elective abortion is a meme that decent & spiritual people reject. For the abortion meme to come to fruition it must always transcend the spiritual realm. If you think that there is a political solution for abortion, you are naïve.  

Abortion is one of life’s most malevolent acts. Malevolence towards life manifests an individual’s disbelief in God. According to Pew, over 73% of Americans claim one of the Abrahamic faiths. According to Guttmacher, 62% of women having an abortion in the US say they belonged to a faith group, while 38% state they had no religious affiliation.  

Frankly, I cannot comprehend how a person that claims that they believe God exists could give consent to have an abortion (I’d understand in cases when the life of the mother is at risk & possibly other reasons). Legitimate belief in God implies that the individual has the “fear of God” within that produces boundaries in one’s behavior. Absence of the “fear of God” gives reason for skepticism of their profession of faith claim.  

Abortion is the easiest and at the same time one of the most difficult questions of mankind to answer. Easiest I say because abortion isn’t a difficult moral question to discern; only obtuse souls fail to grasp the depravity of quenching human life. Difficult I say due to the questions of if the government should allow, restrict or outright forbid an abortion as policy? Ideally, one would think that a philosopher or minister would have the most qualified opinion on abortion – but often both entities have an “anchor” problem with authority (I am referring to God). Just as a boat without an anchor will drift with changing tides, so will a discussion on abortion without mooring.  

How much more bizarre can it be that in a country where 73% follow an Abrahamic faith -- at the same time the country allows for abortion? Stranger yet is the absence of neighborly dialogue on abortion. Townhall posted a 2018 article, “This Is the Most Divisive Issue In America”, which references a 2018 Gallup poll  which lists abortion as the most divisive issue in America. While the abortion issue is highly politicized, the disconnect origin isn’t because of politics, it is due to the unexamined lives and beliefs of the 2.2 billion followers of Jesus (Christianity). You can only have this magnitude of a divide with morality based upon a religious anchor. There is a lack of integrity and discipline within Christianity that allows such.  

Christianity has a messaging problem and it has made a fiasco of the dialogue on abortion. The clergy speak with a forked tongue! Talk about mixed messages! Liberal churches are the leading cheerleaders for pre-meditated murder (abortion) in nearly every large American city while the fundamentalists fight this with all their might! Is the book fuzzy and teach two positions? Is there an inherent weakness in Christianity’s moral code? Or could it be something else?  

Christianity cannot get out of its own way to solve the major problems of society. Either they don’t see, or don’t want to see the actions they should be taking to make the world a better place. They certainly have the capacity! The unexamined life I’m referring to is behind 62% of abortions in America. It’s sad, while I hear their pleas and rhetoric, the reality is that these sounds are merely “politicians’ words” pandering to their base! The salt has lost its savor.  

Before there was Christianity – Stoicism was popular in the Roman Empire - What Stoicism is & why it's worldview was superior             

Prior to Christianity’s European emergence in the 4th century, Stoicism’s worldview was popular to prevalent within the Roman Empire.

Stoicism taught the development of self-control and fortitude as a means of overcoming destructive emotions. They thought the path to happiness for humans is found in accepting the moment as it presents itself, by not allowing oneself to be controlled by the desire for pleasure or fear of pain. Their ethic was to use one's mind to understand the world and to do one’s part in nature's plan. They believed in working together and to treat others fairly and justly. The Stoics thought the best indication of an individual's philosophy was not what a person said, but how a person behaved.  

Frankly, this ex-minister begrudges the Darwinian loss of the Stoic mindset to the Christian victor and feels that the Stoic worldview was better equipped to address the emotionally charged subject of abortion than any partisan group expressing themselves today in society.  

While the Supreme Court’s 1973 Roe vs Wade decided the abortion matter, this issue is far from settled within society. Is the best we can expect from abortion partisans is to hear their rage and watch them march carrying placards?  

My Stoic injection into the discussion of abortion is due to the mental machinations and “gymnastics” that man will go to in avoiding responsibility. You can play this game with Christianity…it isn’t as easy with the Stoics. Thus, the abortion issue manifests the weakness of the Judeo-Christian ethic system. A large segment of the Abrahamic faith subverts and disrespects its own tenants for expediency! That same large segment of Abrahamic faith adherents have an anchor problem with authority – they are untethered souls! By untethered I mean beliefs not attached to what God supposedly said in the Bible.  

What do I mean by anchor?  

Decent people usually have defined & developed what their “core moral beliefs” are, what their boundaries will be, and what behavior is acceptable & what isn’t. This work has been done prior to testing. Anchored souls are predictable. They aren’t expedient, one knows what anchored people will do in most situations. Anchored “souls” have boundaries, the anchor “tethers” them so as they won’t betray those boundaries. For religious people, their anchor is greatly entwined with the tenants of their faith. Peace? Those that follow this largely pre-defined path are designed to have less stressful lives due to the fact that management of most stressful encounters have been mapped out beforehand…all they have to do is follow through (wash-rinse-repeat).  

Joe Biden, the Christian Catholic politician & a leading 2020 US Presidential candidate, shows us his anchor problem in his 2006 abortion statement.             

Joe Biden, 2006 remarks during an interview with Texas Monthly

“I do not view abortion as a choice and a right. I think it's always a tragedy, and I think that it should be rare and safe, and I think we should be focusing on how to limit the number of abortions.  

No Christian should ever advocate for abortion. Biden, part of the 62% group betrays his anchor and speaks as if he were an advocate for the other group, the 38% group that has no religious affiliation. If the church were “salty” they would take care of their business and enact church discipline not only with Biden but all other likeminded politicians that pollute faith tenants all the while encouraging others along the path of degradation.  

I will later revisit Biden’s statement when I address the 38% without a religious anchor. Any reasoned attempts to reduce abortion must start with one’s worldview with knowledge of one’s anchor.  

One cannot escape God in the abortion question, though many try through schemes and manipulation to avoid the repercussions of God given imputation of consciousness in human beings’ psyche. Many seek to suppress or outright avoid any discussion on the concept of God. Atheist attempts fail for this same reason, which is that God gives Homo Sapiens measures of consciousness (it doesn’t matter what some women/men claim, despite their unwillingness to retain God in their knowledge). While religion can be debunked, God consciousness cannot and has not. Any man that violates God given consciousness causes themselves grief that the individual will have to “deal with” or else as the Stoics thought, have to find a way to avoid the pain for the transgression.  

The Unmistakable Biblical Position of Life and Imputation of the Soul  

As for ANY Christian or any other Abrahamic religious convert to have the audacity to champion abortion… it absolutely shows contempt for God!!! The position for ALL Abrahamic religions is given in Genesis 2:7…THIS IS YOUR POSITION and it CANNOT be any other way.  

Genesis 2:7   King James Version

And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.  

At some point, according to the Bible, God imparts a soul to human beings. Genesis 2:7 addresses the when. This IS the Biblical and Abrahamic faith position…deal with it! It is YOUR BOOK. I suppose rebellious contrarians can seek to argue away breathing oxygen in a semantic debate versus ambiotic fluid of the mother’s womb. The context of the verse indicates, if not solves, the timing element in question; in the fetus or at birth? Scripture places this in the formation stage (fetus) by using the word formed.  

Liberals won’t stop here, so neither will I. Lets go from breath to blood via scripture.  

Leviticus 17:11- King James Version  

11 For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul.

Using scripture to ascertain when life begins, we go to Leviticus and its reference to blood. We know from science that blood cells start to develop at five weeks. So, there you have it – at 5 weeks (at the intersection of science and scripture in the fetus) you have life! It stands to reason (for any Abrahamic faith believer) that if it is the blood that as scripture indicates makes an atonement for the soul, that taking blood (as per abortion) is a reasonable place to establish culpability for the taking of life. As I have said, it is not my book any longer. I left the faith when I realized I no longer believed it. Leaving is honorable, staying within and  perverting it is unconscionable. Be decisive and true, if one doesn’t believe—they ought to quickly leave! 

By the way, I still have an anchor as a Deist!  

So, there you have it, 2.2 billion people claiming Christianity that shouldn’t be considering abortion because they have no objective scriptural justification for one! Reminder, abortion is amongst one of life’s most malevolent acts. Malevolence towards life manifests an individual’s disbelief in God.  

Liberals Mess Everything Up -- Including Christianity!

2 Peter 1:20-21

20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. 21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holly men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost

The way Christianity works is that when you accept Christianity, you are agreeing to accept its objective tenants. What do I mean when I say objective? God’s intentions, his will, his very words are written and contained within the 66 books of the Bible. And it is what any true believer pledges when they accept Christ is to do their best to follow God’s will. God makes the rules. It is your responsibility as a believer to know what God’s will is (it’s in the Bible) and comply! The Bible says the Holy Spirit indwells the believer to assist the believer to become holy. No Christian, no minister has a right to do or teach anything contrary to the Bible. Note verse 20 and the words “private interpretation”. God is God, God is the authority…he is the “boss” that has left instructions and what it means is that YOU cannot re-interpret it to fit what your wishes are. It doesn’t matter if you like or dislike it….it is up to you to comply! You are not to play stupid, be slick or naïve, or re-interpret it into something more to your own liking.

God is almost always objective in its Old & New Testaments: man is subjective. I’ll give you an example. Oral Roberts once said he saw a 40-foot Jesus, which is quite a crazy statement. Could it be true? Now the Bible nowhere states that Jesus was very tall, nor does it state that Jesus was a giant. Roberts’ claim was SUBJECTIVE (he made a private interpretation). The Bible is OBJECTIVE and while people can be unskilled interpreters, the convert cannot and should not be accepted into the faith as rebellious contrarians. A rebellious contrarian accepting the faith, yet all the while refusing to change their ways is in direct contradiction of the absolute mandate of repentance! The Bible requires repentance, without it no man sees God. To claim a faith and then as a practice reject its mandates and authority; this is an illegitimate conversion. A Biblical term for this would be bastards. I’m still hammering away at the anchor problem of the Judeo-Christian ethic system….it is pernicious!

The Bible, objectively understood, does not allow for abortion. Abortion should not be considered by any of Christianity’s 2.2 billion adherents’! YES, abortion is not permitted to Christians…it is a subjective, private interpretation that is easily understood by any sound minded believer that is seeking to follow God’s will.  

I’ve never heard of a Christian fundamentalist advocating for abortion. We can poke fun at fundamentalists all we want, but fundamentalists do not have an anchor problem…they believe what the book says, and they will usually have chapter and verse to back up their reasoning. Jesus fed the hungry, healed the sick, upset the money changers tables but I just cannot fathom how anyone could picture Jesus being agreeable with abortion. This doesn’t square with Jesus’ statement of Matthew 19:14 “suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me”. Today’s progressives & liberals have grave intellectual and character issues, their positions are for the most part untethered and built upon un-truths.  

Untethered souls? Untethered souls is a pejorative that expresses disrespect and contempt because the religious person’s actions are unattached to the believers’ stated founding principles. Remember, the Stoics thought the best indication of an individual's philosophy was not what a person said, but how a person behaved. All preachers, politicians (and other prostitutes) that claim a faith and then openly spout out positions contrary to the faith, ought to meet church discipline to include expulsion. Biblical churches were designed to be exclusive entities. Jesus came to give life according to the book, not death…and certainly not abortion! The book says believers are given the Holy Spirit, not the Grim Reaper’s spirit! The untethered pejorative aptly describes the inclusive and unattached weaklings attending these havens justifying abortion.    

The “Sleight of Hand” That Nearly Everyone Missed – How a Baptist Group & Rockefeller Money Weakened Christianity  

Religion is a convenient place for untethered people to nest. While the grounded fundamentalist will kick out the rebellious…there always seems to be money for these “progressive” types to start/follow a rogue organization more committed to eugenic, Malthusian ideology mixed in with a smiley face Jesus for those unable to properly decipher things. The “worker bees” that populate these outfits are so twisted, that they feel they have done humanity service to push death. These types don’t organically arise out of orthodoxy to positions where they can influence…no, they are hirelings with guised agendas. Please understand, liberal churches rarely grow in numbers, they traditionally have minimal standards and people usually leave these congregations (as well as their tithes & offerings) for lack of substantive beliefs. Usually it means financial death for the church. Now just when one should reasonably expect these dying churches to die…they somehow stay afloat. Without outside funding, liberal churches would die off when the money runs out! Yet they persist. What holds them? Legitimate faith dissipates…so it isn’t faith that retains their allegiance. They stay for the agenda…but from where does the money come from?  

Oligarchs with money fund liberal church entities, their money funds eugenics and Malthusian ideas, their money enables voices to propagate causes the oligarch believes in to be spread in society. Few are aware that it has been this way for a very long time in history! Rockefeller, the Baptist, known for his support of eugenics AND “liberal Christianity” was instrumental in pioneering liberal preacher Harry Emerson Fosdick’s career!  

Fosdick’s brother Raymond Fosdick (who rejected Christianity) was president of the Rockefeller Foundation for more than a decade. It was Rockefeller Jr. that in 1922 paid for the distribution of Harry Emerson Fosdick’s sermon “Should the Fundamentalists Win?” to every Protestant minister in the United States. The largest component of Junior’s philanthropy—totaling some $72 million altogether was directed to churches and religious causes. From 1919 to 1933 John Rockefeller Jr. was the largest single contributor to the Northern Baptist denomination. The Northern Baptists, which became the American Baptist Convention and is now called the American Baptist Churches USA. As an aside and to their credit, at least the Northern Baptists were against slavery.  

Every fundamentalist alive with a sense of fundamentalist history is very aware of Fosdick’s presence and impact of liberalism. What is obscure is how the dots aren’t connected. Sure, we all know of Fosdick’s liberalism. But was Rockefeller’s backing of Fosdick for something other than to agitate fundamentalists? Perhaps Rockefeller just couldn’t stomach a rigid Christianity and funded someone to take Christianity towards a less literal understanding? No, I don’t think so! Let’s see…Rockefeller believed in eugenics and financially funded the same. Any coincidence that Raymond had great influence with the distribution of funding as President of Rockefeller’s Foundation? Anyone notice that Harry Fosdick was recognized and given the Albert Lasker award by Planned Parenthood in 1953? Fosdick served to break down the spiritual barriers for Rockefeller’s eugenics to be implanted in the Christian church. Didn’t the Bible state that money is the root of all evil?  

Liberal Christianity needs to be de-bunked as illegitimate and a front for Malthusians with eugenic ideas! This is what fundamentalists should be saying, but they aren’t! Preach against liberalism all you want but the point of liberalism’s induction was for eugenic/Malthusian reasoning's (not aimless liberalism), the church missed this BIG point! Religious conservatives haven’t fared well at all against the liberals. In fact, they have ceded ground on most every position before losing to the liberals. Why? For one thing, you can’t hold irrational religious positions & still be formidable in secular society. Anyone that seeks to honestly discern what scripture teaches by employing a literal objective method of interpretation runs into problems. This is the “unexamined life” that I referred to earlier. 

Life Begins at Conception – Despite What Anyone Else Says

Does life begin at conception? Of course, it does, the answer is YES. Again, the cantankerous can offer up an unsatisfactory debate which to me is more evidence of Stoic insight that mankind will seek to avoid God imparted consciousness and the pain of violating the same. Bottom line is that abortion terminates God’s life process.  

What is my authority? A Deist doesn’t have an anchor problem (we believe that there is a God) and we discern nature’s plan as self-evident to produce a child.

Frankly, I don't have the requisite hours available for rebutting all the insufficient machinations that un-rational, un-conscious souls offer up on abortion. I think philosopher Stefan Molyneux’s  Freedomain: The Abortion Debate - and Ask Me Anything!  does a good job addressing these for clear-thinking objective people. As an aside, I particularly like the points he makes that if abortion were illegal it would greatly change behavior and how this would be better for family structure!  

Before we go any further, I’d like to state that I’m not taking a position on what Stoics official position was or what their thought of abortion was. I’m simply stating their intent of not allowing oneself to be controlled by the desire for pleasure or fear of pain. Yes, I’m clearly stating that I believe life’s process starts at conception and to terminate it is treading into God’s realm to thwart how man/woman is brought into our world. Regardless of any reason that mankind would make to end the pregnancy, the decision maker will of necessity have to deal with the repercussions of the decision to terminate it as most women (when being candid) express that they deal with guilt for having had an abortion. The term is called Post Abortion Stress Syndrome (PASS). This is how consciousness works in human beings. Was I being pre-mature or being too strong by calling it pre-meditated murder? No, I don’t think so because the intent was to terminate life and the decision maker had time to process the thought before making the decision. I believe in “God’s eyes” (remember I am a sincere Deist that champions reason) that a miscarriage or for that matter the inability to get pregnant could be viewed as God’s intervention in the process of life….whereas abortion is a conscious choice (not an accident) that was intentionally made for the cessation of life’s process.  


My Vision of Abortion as Policy  

With this all said, it would seem that I am clearly siding with pro-life ideas. Any Deist by reason must come to the conclusion that God gave man the ability to procreate and that grant should be respected! I have plenty of respect for the Jainist principle of ahimsa (nonviolence) as well as Albert Schweitzer’s ideas for the reverence for life and I strongly concur with the Hippocratic oath “to do no harm” ought to be strictly followed by medical personnel. Personally, I don’t know how anyone could agree with personally being the entity involved in a pregnancy to turn upon God’s designs and thwart the developing life. I’ve only gotten one women pregnant in my life (my ex-wife) and we wanted to have a child (which we had…she is now approaching her teenage years). Abortions are terrible in almost all cases, I don’t think I could ever give my consent for anyone I’m involved with to have an abortion. To do so, in most scenarios would be morally wrong. I’ve said in most cases abortion is morally wrong; whomever factors into that if morally wrong decision (pregnant lady, fertile male, clergyman, family, counselor, decision maker even if just by influence, abortion provider, the entity paying for the abortion) are all culpable.  

Confession, what has been written thus far has been a long time coming and therapeutic for me to express. Toying with liberals is easy, it comes naturally. I’m in a position to say things that other conservatives can’t. At this point, I have reached a turning point and will weigh in on many things conservatives don’t see, things they want to ignore and exploit the weakness of a religious based conservatism (I won’t enjoy it) but it will be therapeutic.  

Dissatisfaction with both Pro-life and Pro-choice positions  

Still, I’ve expressed dissatisfaction with both pro-life and pro-choice positions. I’ll end up landing in the position that for governmental policy, abortion should be legal with many boundaries. I think in a short time, I’ve been fair and straightforward, not respectful of elective abortion. I’ve wrestled with my thoughts on abortion for a very long time. My thoughts are very similar to the afore mentioned Molyneux and I think anyone would have a difficult time rebutting his reasoned thoughts on the matter…but ultimately, I don’t think that his viewpoint should be policy for reasons that I will get to.

The Depravity of Man Without the Theology – Unconstrained vs. Constrained Vision  

Being a trained minister, all decent educators of Christian theology make certain that ministers are absolute about the depravity of man! Still today, as a non-Christian ex-minister, I believe in aspects of the depravity of man. Christians should not be embarrassed about the term; they should view it as a truism and boldly proclaim it! Of modern thinkers, Thomas Sowell in his brilliant analysis distinguishes between what he calls the constrained vision versus the unconstrained vision of man. These concepts are laid out in his “A Conflict of Visions” and his “The Vision of the Anointed”. You will understand the world much better if you were to digest these concepts. One can find great video on You Tube as well as Peter Robinson’s “Uncommon Knowledge” videos made possible by Stanford’s Hoover Institution.  

UNCONSTRAINED VISION - Sowell argues that the unconstrained vision relies heavily on the belief that human nature is essentially good. Those with an unconstrained vision distrust decentralized processes and are impatient with large institutions and systemic processes that constrain human action. They believe there is an ideal solution to every problem, and that compromise is never acceptable. Collateral damage is merely the price of moving forward on the road to perfection. Sowell often refers to them as "the self-anointed." Ultimately, they believe that man is morally perfectible. Because of this, they believe that there exist some people who are further along the path of moral development, have overcome self-interest and are immune to the influence of power and therefore can act as surrogate decision-makers for the rest of society.  

CONSTRAINED VISIONSowell argues that the constrained vision relies heavily on belief that human nature is essentially unchanging, and that man is naturally inherently self-interested, regardless of the best intentions. Human nature is flawed, but it is fixed. Those with a constrained vision prefer the systematic processes of the rule of law and experience of tradition. Compromise is essential because there are no ideal solutions, only trade-offs. Those with a constrained vision favor solid empirical evidence and time-tested structures and processes over intervention and personal experience. Ultimately, the constrained vision demands checks and balances and refuses to accept that all people could put aside their innate self-interest. The question is how do we erect institutions that contain our flaws and permit us to live in the best possible society given the effect the fallen character of human nature?  

Sowell is succinct and sums it up well. Disclaimer here, I’m not pretending to infer his position on abortion or the Bible. I simply want to draw attention to two competing visions on how many might and often do view our world. Sowell’s constrained vison aligns largely with the depravity of man taken from scripture (so be it). A constrained view is foundational to conservative vantagepoints. Again, as a Deist, I am not religious, we have no theology and Deists seek to discern by God given reason in nature and thus I come to the conclusion that the Constrained vision best indicates reality. The unfortunate reality is that since Secular Conservatism is but a gleam in the eye of myself and others (this writer has exchanged some emails with those that see its importance—but I won’t name drop) – due to the lack of vision, amity & fear of religious conservatives and thus the funding they traditionally get restrains this very rational vision from reaching or getting its due exposure to a much larger non-religious audience where it would be formidable if given opportunity to germinate.  

In the battle for supremacy of ideas, since the constrained vision is very similar to the depravity of man – it is outright dismissed by many due to its religious connotations. It sounds Biblical and thus many will outright reject it!  

By the way, I should draw a distinction between those that champion reason. Both Atheists and Deists are both secular, neither view would accept or claim a theology or believe in a God given revelation of scripture. Most atheists (by claiming Atheism rather than Agnosticism or Deism) have contempt for religion…but not all do. Some Deists have contempt for religion as well, but no Deist has contempt for the concept of God or have an anchor problem.  

Where am I going with this?  

Moral reasoning is but the starting point when discussing abortion. If morality were the only factor involved, there would be much, much less abortion taking place. Everyone knows that family structure, living arrangements, economics, health of the mother and baby, the mindset of the father and mother and sustainability, scandal and privacy issues of immorality exposure are amongst other factors involved. Yes, its most always morally wrong and complicated!  

Abortion is THE ISSUE where tradeoffs come into the picture!  

Abortion has been strategically framed to produce the results which we have today. Pro-Choice vs. Pro-Life has always been a dialectic designed, aligned and approved by those Malthusians with eugenic ideology to keep the abortion meter spinning.  

Then, there is the matter of unwanted children. The following is from an unnamed woman (sorry, I cannot specify the anonymous author). There are many ideas in this, I won’t attempt to edit any part of it. I think you should read it…and think.  

“Unwanted Children”

There are 415,000 children right now in foster care in the US alone. 10,000 just in the state of Kentucky... right now. Worldwide there are 132 MILLION orphans awaiting adoption. Every day, 353,000 babies are born, increasing the population by 80 million people a year. In fact for every 2 people that die, another 5 babies are born to replace them. Which makes me wonder, if every baby is a miracle, why are so many babies growing up to become members of ISIS, Boko Haram, the Taliban, the mafia, or just common criminals? Why are so many teenage kids not able to find work? Why is it that so many COLLEGE GRADUATES are unable to find work?! Why is it we are so worried about those in our immediate family, and getting them the best in life, but so few of us are able to crunch the numbers when it comes to buying each child what they need? Why are so many people worldwide -- more than 3 BILLION -- living in poverty? Could it be... is it possible... that maybe we are having TOO MANY babies? Could it be that, just like any other commodity, the more children there are in the world, the less valuable each individual becomes? Could it be that, when it comes to babies, we think with our hearts, rather than our heads? Could it be that -- for every baby we add to our family, we must divide our salary, and by so doing, diminish the opportunities available to each child in the family? If babies are a miracle, why are so many in foster care, or awaiting adoption, unable to be placed in a permanent, loving family? Do babies stop being a miracle at 4 or 8 or 16? Are ALL babies miracles?... or is it just MY baby that's a miracle? ...just a thought to consider the next time we ponder the biggest decision of their lives... having a baby.

You might ask, “Brian, why with your view that abortion is pre-meditative murder, why do you feel that US Government’s policy should allow for abortion?” Am I being two-faced? Inconsistent? Speaking with a forked tongue?

1.   First, personally I have never given consent, nor could I envision myself ever giving consent for an abortion with anyone I’ve ever been involved with. Culpability rest with the entity giving the order to take life & those performing the abortion. This doesn’t involve me personally.

2.   I believe in the constrained vision of man. I view abortion as a trade-off. Trade-off of what? Answer is "unwanted kids" that women most cases it isn't a desireable situtation for the unwanted kid having parents that don't want them...these kids, in most cased are treated cruelly and have a much tougher life ahead of them.

3.   I have a “beef” with Christian conservatives. Religious conservatives are a part of the problem. Their simplistic mindset goes something like this: “If only the rest of the world would accept Jesus, a large part of the world’s problems would go away and mankind would have a much better life.” Not so! Rebuttal is that 2.2 Billion do believe and yet 54% of that earlier 62% number of women having an abortion claim to be Christian. As these #'s indicate, a large # of Christian women with unwanted children kill their own via abortion...yet, a number of the children they end up having are raised unwanted and subjected to an unloving childhood (all the while the mother is spared the stigma of having had an  abortion but the parental cruety of them raising the child is really tough for the child growing up. A child shouldn't have to ask or beg for the basics of being loved or wanted by their parents. An "outwardly religious" home can mask the reality of two-faced parents raising their own unwanted child.

4.   Regardless of reason, many women find themselves pregnant and they don’t want children. Beyond the number of abortions, look at the number of children in foster homes and those waiting for adoption. This is an undesirable situation (see “Unwanted Children”).

5.   Ever heard of filicide? Filicide is the deliberate act of a parent killing their own child. Note (unwanted child) whose parent has up until the time of the filicide successfully subdued the wicked attitudes of the parental heart!  Hardly 4-5 days pass that a “heart wrenching” new case of filicide is in the news. Who really knows the real numbers of children that outwardly appear welcomed members of their families that are despised and unwanted by the parents or guardians. There are so many instances of filicide, at the time of writing the case of 4 year old Noah Cuartro made headlines, the headline reads” Boy died 'months after begging social services not to send him back to parents'  

6. Ever heard of filial cruelty? (cruelty toward one's own child)

7. Read Martha Woodruff's, Is Abortion Always Wrong?  PS: I don't agree with everything she wrote but she makes some very valid points and I agree with many of them!



With Abortion being legal....these countermeasures should also apply!

My earlier criticism of Biden had to do with his duplicity of being a Christian without boundaries. Again, a Christian should never advocate for abortion. Personally, I think for a summation upon abortion, Biden's statement has value:

“I do not view abortion as a choice and a right. I think it's always a tragedy, and I think that it should be rare and safe, and I think we should be focusing on how to limit the number of abortions."

1. Tax paying citizens shouldn't bear the financial load, thus federal, state or local government funds should not be utilized. People who "dance" should have to "pay for the band" themselves!

2.  Privacy matters need to be re-examined. I don't think it is right that an elective abortion takes place with the mother and father's identity kept confidential. There ought to be a public record on all abortions with pertinent information being required. Potential spouses of either the man or woman should be able to reference if their potential partner was involved with a life taking matter! This point alone should greatly lessen the # of abortions!

3.  Entities such as religious groups shouldn't be muzzled as they seek to raise consciousness. Of course, there ought to be guidelines for obnoxious types that have no boundaries (such as Westboro Baptists). Legal statutes should be plainly established and enforced.

4.  Human guilt is real. Newborn babies sometimes are "left upon a doorstep" to be discovered by someone else. These receiving entities (often religious groups) should be entitled to government funding.

5.  Kids given up for adoption, upon turning 18 or graduating from high school ought to be given access to whom their parents are upon request. Privacy records be damned! These "parents" should have a mandate to keep registration records updated at stated intervals. Thus, these records should be recorded prior to adoption and that kid should be able upon graduation to current information about their real parents.

6.  Social services policy, family services, lawmakers, juvenile courts and media entities that sow division ought to be trained and restrained from decadent behavior, abetting, and marketing decadence. The scriptures tell us that God created the world in 6 days...but after the initial creation it takes 9 months to bring a child into the world. This speaks to my heart of the importance of everyday nurture!

7.  There ought to be a registry, open to all who wish to inquire, of every religious organization & its people that benefit from their tax status. Why, and what has this to do with abortion? Unwanted children often end up going through their doors...and they shouldn't be preyed upon! A safe haven should be a safe verify! People should have the right to know if they should be concerned with anyone involved in that organization. If they have nothing to hide then they have nothing to worry about. But, if any religious organization is caught perpetuating, abetting, looking the other way or etc. ... they should pay for their misdeeds! Up to the point of seizure and relinquishment of all assets. It ought to be hard as hell to hide or harbor perverts! WE ARE NOT DOING ENOUGH TO PUT AN END TO CHILD ABUSE! 


this article was written by Brian Worley 


Brian Worley  August 19, 2019   All Rights Reserved

To Return to the Main Page