Stones to Bread
A Pro-Life Plea This Election Season
A woman is standing in the bathroom, staring at the white wand in her shaking hand. Her disbelief gives way to anger, then despair. She has five children. She can't afford childcare—she'll have to quit her job. Her house is too small for another child. Her family's business is under threat, and her husband will be traveling more than ever. She's just come through another unplanned pregnancy. She is well past 40. How can she be pregnant at this age when using birth control? How can she go through another pregnancy, another birth? How can she raise another child?
Then a thought comes: This could all just go away. No one would know. She feels a lift. There is a way out.
That woman, of course, was me. Never did I imagine I would consider abortion, even for a few seconds.
Reading this, some will write me: "How could you even think that? You're a terrible mother. Don't you know every child is a blessing?" I know because I got some of those e-mails when my book Surprise Child came out a few years ago.
I'm thinking about all this again because we are facing an election cycle in which life-ethics issues are almost daily news, and because January 15th is National Sanctity of Life Sunday.
Those last unexpected pregnancies jarred me awake in so many ways. I discovered that 20 percent of all women obtaining abortions self-identify as evangelical, charismatic, fundamentalist, or born-again, according to the pro-choice Guttmacher Institute. That's somewhere around 200,000 believing American women a year ending the life of their child.
Can this be true? While I was speaking on a talk show about the topic, a woman called in and said, "I work outside an abortion clinic, trying to save lives, and you wouldn't believe how many cars in the parking lot have Bibles in their front seats and Christian radio stickers on the back. The women are almost always alone, and they're really scared."
I understand that fear. And I think local church culture bears at least some responsibility. We've so spiritualized the fight for life, we may be losing lives because of it. We know God is the maker of every human being. We know that premarital and extramarital sex is contrary to God's Word. Our beliefs on this front are passionate and unbending, and they should be. But I fear that our conviction and certainty can lead to lack of compassion when women make mistakes.
I attended a church a few years ago whose (male) leaders would not support a church-sponsored baby shower for a pregnant teen unless she repented of her sin—publicly. If there is no room for error, no message of grace, women in crisis will continue to drive out of church all the way to abortion clinics, their Bibles on the front seat, scared toward death.
I fear as well that the politicization of "pro-life" has desensitized us to seeing the people involved. We speak in military terms: the "fight for life." We draw battle lines and launch campaigns. We objectify mothers and are so focused on saving the fetus that we neglect the mother. Though evangelicals have over the past decade become more convinced of the importance of supporting unwed mothers, many of us still labor under the idea that once the baby is born, we've won the fight and can move on to the next one. But where does that leave mother and child?
As I struggled wearily through my last two pregnancies, I learned that "pro-life" was far more than a cause, a box to check off on a ballot. I was acutely aware that I was not gestating a political platform, a point of theology, a spiritual or moral issue: I was growing within my own body a human being with a body—and that is where I needed to be met. Every day.
Stones to Bread
- The Cosmos's Best-Kept Secret
- Throwing Christ Over the Cliff
- Why Are Our Communion Meals So Paltry?
- Intercultural Fiesta Fail
- A Wordless Presence

The 'Handicap Icon' Gets New Life

Sidelining the Stigma of Mental Illness

(on articles open to the public, you must at least register for a free account).













Comments
Displaying 13 of 24 comments
See all comments
A Hermit
How often did President Bush mention the murder of innocent children in his state of the union addresses? I do not believe once- but he did mention Social Security 'Reform'. Why is it that Republican 'Pro-lifers' will filibuster and fight tooth and nail against tax increases for the wealthy- but will not filibuster and fight hard for the protection of life? Why is abortion only mentioned in passing? Could it be that the primary agenda for many 'pro-life' politicians is that of wealth for the wealthy and powerful- and they know as long as abortion is legal, they can count on the 'Pro-life' vote?
jillstevens
Actually, Bush had a Republican house for 6 of 8 years and a Republican Senate 4 of 8 years. To say that "nothing changed" isn't correct. Bush quickly put an end to partial birth abortions in 2003. That is, an end to stabbing the infant's head and suctioning out the brain of a very healthy baby, who the mother decided at the last minute that she didn't want. The baby feels everything that is being done, it's nervous system and everything else makes the baby no different than a live born infant, it is in fact, infanticide. No physician should ever violate their code of ethics to murder an infant in this way. And no country should have such low moral standards. That said, in one of his very first acts as President, obama reinstated partial birth abortions. At least, praise God, Pres. Bush knows the evils of that sordid practice called partial birth abortions. And sadly, we have a pres. who, while in the Illinois senate, voted 3 times for infanticide if a baby survived an abortion.
robert
for six years the republicans had control of the white house, congress and a majority on the supreme court , and yet nothing changed about abortion laws, why was there never an outcry from all the evangelcals that kept telling us "WHO"( if we were good christians) should vote for in 2000, when after getting elected nothing changed?