Faithful Democrats - From the Culture Wars to the Common Good

From the Culture Wars to the Common Good

By Robert Jones

Jul. 25, 07 12:08

Tags: Evangelical, Family and Culture,

Last week, Democrats in the House made a quiet but significant step toward healing one of America's deepest divides by passing the "Reducing the Need for Abortions Initiative" as part of the 2008 Labor-HHS Appropriations bill for 2008.

The $647 million abortion reduction package includes many of the provisions in the Reducing the Need for Abortions and Supporting Parents Act (H.R. 1074), legislation developed by Third Way, a progressive think tank, in partnership with pro-life Democrat Tim Ryan (OH - 17) and pro-choice Democrat Rosa L. DeLauro (CT - 3).

The bill's novel approach seeks to reduce the need for abortions by increasing resources both for prevention of unintended pregnancies (such as contraception, sex education, and after school programs) and for services to meet the needs of young women in difficult circumstances who may be deciding whether they are in a position to raise a child (such as child care and health care assistance, adoption awareness). This approach stakes out a new, more nuanced position for the Democratic Party that takes seriously the moral complexity that many Americans feel on this issue. As Rachel Laser, Director of the Third Way Culture Project, noted in a recent dispatch about the legislation, "The Democrats remain and will always be the party of abortion rights, but they are looking more and more like they are also the party of reducing the need for abortion."

The significance of progress on this front should not be underestimated. The issue of abortion has been the quintessential "wedge issue." As it has been marshaled in endless political races over the last few decades, abortion has evolved into a kind of proper noun that conjures an entire worldview. For both Republicans and Democrats, it has become a symbol that inspires, a badge that identifies friend or foe, a litmus test for inclusion, a banner under which to march. One only needs to look at local races, where candidates for school board or county clerk often include their stance on abortion in campaign materials, survey bumper stickers in an average parking lot, or listen in on first dates when the conversation turns to politics to see its symbolic power. "So, are you pro-life or pro-choice?" The question demands a binary answer even as most of us struggle internally with all the qualifiers we really feel.

Despite the binary nature of the issue as a symbol, when asked the right questions, Americans demonstrate this complexity. According to the recent 2006 Pew Religion and Public Life Survey, a majority (55%) of the country can be called "abortion grays," who think that abortion should neither be legal nor illegal all the time. Most importantly, two-thirds (66%) of Americans (and even 61% of white Evangelicals) believe that the country should find some "middle ground" on abortion laws (Pew, August 3, 2006).

The complexities of the issue are felt especially when binary positions are put into conversation with the language of faith. To put this in the context of Christianity, on the one hand, Christians are certainly commanded to value and protect life, but not in an unqualified way or at all costs -- note for example the cases of rape, incest, or saving the life of the mother, where even a majority (51%) of white Evangelicals believe abortion is allowable (Pew, August 3, 2006). On the other hand, Christians are commanded to respect the human capacity and responsibility for making free choices, to be compassionate, and to support social conditions that allow choices to truly be free. And as far back as Augustine in the 4^th century, Christians have understand this world as an imperfect place where difficult, even tragic choices are sometimes made and where the coercive power of law has its limits.

The problem with issues that become symbols is that they spawn entire industries that, rather than looking for solutions that work for the common good, have a vested interest in perpetuating polarization. Although the Republican Party and the far religious right have marketed abortion, religion, and the GOP as a seamless garment, it is striking that with a Republican president and Congress, this administration has done virtually nothing that would actually reduce the number of abortions in America. For serious people of faith who care about abortion as a problem to address rather than a symbol to wield merely for partisan gain, this new Democratic effort to find common ground on the shared value of reducing abortions without imperiling a woman's health or putting anyone in prison should be welcomed as real progress and as a hopeful beginning to a new, more civil era in our shared public life.

LIST OF COMMENTS

3/10. Who cares where the Republicans are

When it comes to the life of an unborn baby, who cares about politics? This issue in the political world is a joke. Its a power strugle. In the eyes of God, it must be heart breaking but alas, He knows the hearts of man. Circumstances of rape, insest and the life of the mother come up as issues where its ok to have an abortion. Who here, as man, can claim to know who's life is more valuable to Gods purpose? Issues of reducing the felt need of abortions are likewise a joke. Who really "needs" an abortion? The troubled teen that dosent want to get caught in their indescretion? The mother of four who really cant afford another mouth to feed? A victom of rape or insest? (the smallest % of abortions are due to rape or insest) Are we not to consider trials and tribulations pure joy? Not according to common views. We are to live a life of comfort and ease. My daughter can walk into an abortion clinic and receive an abortion with out my permission. Of course she would never do such a thing as I have raised her keep her pants on. The funny thing is when she went to get her ear pierced for the second time, she needed parental concent. Talk about some flawed logic. Throwing money at this felt need is in no way the answer. The answer lies in the Gosple message. These girls or women, need Jesus, not a government paycheck.

5/10. Yes, i'm sure of the reasoning

Well Jesse, no I don't favor the government banning abortions outright. History has taught that lesson to those who would listen.

Its the same for many things, look at the prohibition in the 20's. Not very successful, look at abortions prior to Roe.v.Wade, pretty ugly.

Did Jesus give the woman at the well some money to help her in her sin? Of course not, He pointed out the errors of her ways and gently taught her the truth.

I'm not all all implying that educating young women on the choices is a bad thing. If indeed this program saves the lives of unborn babies, its a wonderful thing.

But shouldn't it also be solely about the Gospel Message? Wouldn't this alone be as effective a tool to those that would listen? Isn't God sufficient in everything? I don't seek to judge these women, only give hope that there is something better.

In my opinion, The Gospel message is far superior to any government program. As for the life of the unborn fetus, is it not in the hands of a young woman? Is she not the issue at hand? She alone will make a decision as to the life of he unborn fetus. I can love this unborn child as a new father to be, yet have no rights regarding its life if the woman who is carrying this child decides to abort. So to be blunt, its not a matter of caring about the unborn fetus, its a matter if changing the hearts of young women. The end result of a changed heart is the life of a child.

7/10. Nothing is more Cruel

Than the plight of a woman who has recently been r#ped, and then finds that they are pregnant. They are ashamed of what happened, they don't want anyone to know, because no one will believe them anyways. People will just say that they made it up.

And then they are angry that they must make this choice, and if they do, then they are ashamed that they did, and if they do not, then the pregnancy becomes a burden, a reminder of the crime. I've heard the story many times. It is not an easy choice.

Perhaps the people that should find Jesus, are not the woman who have suffered at the hand of tyranny, rather it should be the men who to often believe, that beyond a certain point, a woman does not have the right to say no.

Have you ever considered the reason that the % of woman who recieve abortions due to incest and r#pe is so low, is directly related the fact that under half of all r#pes are reported? As long as a r#pe occurs every 8 minutes in America, birth control is a mute point.

8/10. Who gets the check?

Throwing money at this felt need is in no way the answer. The answer lies in the Gosple message. These girls or women, need Jesus, not a government paycheck.

Right. In this administration the government paychecks go to "faith-based" (evangelical Christian, mostly) organizations selling the snake oil that is "abstinence only education," and "abstinence educators" who say things like this when they think no one else is listening.

At Reclaiming America for Christ, Stenzel told her audience about a conversation she’d had with a skeptical businessman on an airplane. The man had asked about abstinence education’s success rate—a question she regarded as risible. “What he’s asking,” she said, “is does it work. You know what? Doesn’t matter. Cause guess what. My job is not to keep teenagers from having sex. The public schools’ job should not be to keep teens from having sex.” Then her voice rose and turned angry as she shouted, “Our job should be to tell kids the truth!”

“People of God,” she cried, “can I beg you, to commit yourself to truth, not what works! To truth! I don’t care if it works, because at the end of the day I’m not answering to you, I’m answering to God!”

Later in the same talk, she explained further why what “works” isn’t what’s important—and gave some insight into what she means by “truth.” “Let me tell you something, people of God, that is radical, and I can only say it here,” she said. “AIDS is not the enemy. HPV and a hysterectomy at twenty is not the enemy. An unplanned pregnancy is not the enemy. My child believing that they can shake their fist in the face of a holy God and sin without consequence, and my child spending eternity separated from God, is the enemy. I will not teach my child that they can sin safely.”

That's Pam Stenzel, quoted in Kingdom Coming by Michelle Goldberg.

Yup. Prevention isn't the point. Government paychecks for proselytizers is.

9/10. Please!!

Terrance, you act as though abstinance education is some new idea that has only been around since the last 7 years or so, since Bush initiated the Faith Based Initiatives programs. Just wonder though was it OK with you that when Clinton was in office the abortion clinics got all the money? Was that just all about the money?

Abstinance education has been around for thousands of years, you can read about it in your bible. Only in the last 40 years or so has the sex education, birth control influence taken hold. As long as the scriptures will be around abstinance education will continue to stay around, it is not about the money. Money is a great resource, but it solves nothing. It is what is done with the money that counts, and regardless of your objections, abstinance is the only 100% effective means by which pregnancy, STDs and the resulting abortions will be avoided. Any other means presents some level of risk.

Sounds like a program worth funding to me.

Last Updated ( Jul. 25, 07 12:15 )

< Prev		Next >

Find other books from Faithful Democrats at our Amazon store!