Veni Quid Veniat

     Forty years ago today, the Supreme Court ruled that the Constitution protected the right of mothers to kill their unborn children. Since that time, 55 million preborn babies have been killed. The court that decided the case, each Congress that failed to act to remedy the effects of the decision, and every president who appointed judges who would uphold the decision have the blood of 55 million innocents on their hands. More than that, though, every person, whether a politician or private individual, who yields support to the decision, whether directly or through their silence, partakes in the premeditated murder of thousands every day.

     The facts in the case are clear. The arguments against abortion are so numerous that it is difficult to list them all completely. One could argue, as Dietrich Bonhoeffer did, that even the potential for life is worthy of respect, not violence. One could argue that, absent a clear definition of the beginning of life, one should err on the side of caution and avoid the murder of innocents at all costs. One could argue that every human life is precious, and that since the preborn child is both a genetically new human and is quite obviously alive, it is a human life and, absent forfeiture of its right to life through its actions, deserves to live. One could argue that convenience is not worth the termination of even the potential for life. Regardless of the particular argument one chooses to use, the duty of moral individuals is clear: to endeavor with all their strength to clean their hands of the blood of unborn children and halt the legalized genocide that is occurring in America today.

     That the duty to protect life is a corporate, not an individual, duty should be clear to anyone with an understanding of the basic concepts of law and justice. Indeed, the first purpose of government is to protect life against those who might try to take it. This fact is reflected not only in the US Constitution's well-known protection of "life, liberty, and property," with life listed first, but also in the legal code of every civilized nation. We cannot simply stand by and argue that it is not our choice, or that the issue is too difficult for us. If we wish to have a government it must protect all life, else no life is truly protected. If we wish to protect life, life it or not, we must define it, and no logically defensible definition of human life can begin anywhere but at the point when a new instance of the human species comes into existence.

     While all of society partakes of this duty - a duty which US society has failed to fulfill - it falls particular heavily on Christians. The argument for a non-Christian to protect the unborn, while compelling, is essentially pragmatic: if we do not value all life, what is to say that we will value yours? The argument for a Christian, however, is much stronger. Christians are flatly commanded to "Open your mouth for the speechless, in the cause of all who are appointed to die." It would be difficult to imagine a situation that more perfectly fits the command issued in this verse than that of an unborn child. The duty of the Christian is clear.

     It would seem, then, that ringing condemnations of abortion as precisely what it is - the violent murder of helpless innocents - would ring out from every Christian, whether pastor or layman, in the country. Instead, although some voices speak out, we are left with a troubling silence from the bulk of Christianity (and even support for abortion from some of the more liberal factions). Why is this? Even those who have gone on record as opposing abortion do not seem to have the urgency in their actions that might be expected. Every day thousands of babies are murdered, yet many cannot be troubled to denounce this genocide regularly. Why? Perhaps it is because speaking out emphasizes the horror of what is happening. As long as we remain silent it is possible to deliberately fail to realize the fact that murder is legal and to ignore the duty to act that would accompany such a realization, thus avoiding the consequences which would accompany taking action.

     Stories are told of churches in Germany who, in order to drown out the cries of Jews who were being transported to their deaths on railroad tracks behind the church, began singing hymns. Christians in America are just as complicit as those German Christians. Christians are caught up in activities and projects, ignoring the silent cries of the unborn. Christians have ignored the issue completely or, worse still, advocated allowing some children to be killed. We, as a group, have refused to consistently support political candidates who will take an uncompromising stand on abortion, despite the fact that we have an unparalleled opportunity - one that those in Germany did not have - to influence our country's policy. Many even argued that economic factors, not abortion, should play the primary role in deciding on a candidate. Every day that we ignore abortion is another day that thousands die, yet Christians seem to lack a sense of urgency. Even in politics, where we have the biggest influence (and responsibility), Christians treat abortion as a box to be checked - the candidate need only make a profession of being pro-life, however obviously insincere, and Christians will flock to the polls in droves to support him, all while loudly proclaiming their determined opposition to abortion. The actions of Christians in America, with a few admirable exceptions, are marked by a singular apathy toward abortion. This apathy cannot continue. As long as abortion continues in our country, we have blood on our hands.

     Sing louder, church. Forty years have gone by, and you still have not drowned out the cries.