The overturning of the fifty-year-old Roe vs Wade legislation that allowed abortion in the USA has provoked all sorts of reactions.

For Christians such as myself, who have long campaigned for the sanctity of all human life from the moment of conception, it is a pivotal and momentous point in history. As our holy Bible says: ‘When justice is done, it brings joy to the righteous but terror to evildoers.’ (Prov 21:15)

Four reflections

Yet to our rejoicing can I suggest we add three other things:

The first is reflection. Here can I suggest the need for all of us to recognise that we are dealing with sensitive and painful matters in which great hurt has often been experienced. Many women silently bear deep mental scars over an abortion and so any triumph must be seasoned with grace.

A second reflection is that while this is a victory, it is not the victory we wanted. What we have seen is the legal verdict, undergirded by bitter politics, that the earlier 1973 Supreme Court ruling which mandated legalised abortion nationally was flawed. What would have been infinitely preferable would have been a universal recognition of the moral argument against abortion, which is that it involves the taking of a defenceless human life. Without such a recognition, this legal decision may simply breed further division and fuel the already bitter culture war.

A third reflection is that this victory is a restatement of two great truths: one, that what a woman bears in her womb is not merely ‘foetal tissue’ but a human life; and two, that abortion is not an acceptable means of birth control. Indeed, it is worth remembering that in the fifty years since Roe vs Wade the quantity and quality of contraception available has improved enormously.

A fourth reflection, heightened by the immediate press response, is the troubled recognition that we Christians will now face bitter counter-attacks, as l have already experienced on my social media. These accusations we must suffer. A point we must make, however, is that for we Christians who are pro-life, this is not all that defines us. The gospel of Christ is about a rich love, grace, forgiveness, healing and new life.

Response and resolution

Rejoicing, reflection but also response. As many people are pointing out, it is not enough to declare an action illegal; we must offer an alternative. Being pro-life always means asking how to help women welcome new life and we must pray that many will adopt unwanted babies and fund childcare.

And finally, resolution. We in the UK are of course aware that the overturning of an American law has no relevance here. Yet it is a profound encouragement that legislation can be reversed and that with prayer and persistence ungodly laws can be changed. May our UK government ponder this ruling and do the same here.

I would rather stand with God and be judged by the world, than stand with the world and be judged by God. Let us pray and persist to see the evil of abortion eradicated here.

‘This day I call the heavens and the earth as witnesses against you that I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Now choose life, so that you and your children may live.’ (Deut 30:19)

The Continuing Debate

Arguments for a position of almost unregulated abortion:

1.  ‘A foetus is no more than a lump of cells.’ In fact much more is now known about the life of the unborn child and I urge you to find out more about the miniature being that already exists after two months of pregnancy. (This website explains human development in the womb.) In view of the fact that the ending of brainwaves is taken as an indicator of death, it is worth noting that increasingly complex brainwave activity occurs from the second month of pregnancy. Moreover, the heartbeat can be detected from just 3 weeks and 1 day! The baby in the womb truly is ‘fearfully and wonderfully made’ (Psalm 139:14).
2. ‘Removal of a foetus is no different from the elimination of a gall stone or an appendix.’ I believe that the seriousness of abortion is more widely sensed in the general public than is commonly claimed. Few people take any pride or pleasure in abortion. I’ve seen photos and even test tubes of people’s removed gall stones. No one treats the ‘eliminated foetus’ that way.
3. ‘Because the foetus has no independent, autonomous existence it cannot be considered to be living or to have rights.’ Here I surely need only to mention the fact that no new-born infant has any independent autonomy for many months or even years. There’s not a lot of difference between being fed from the breast or through an umbilical cord.
4. ‘Abortion must be necessary to save the life of the mother.’ Medical friends tell me such occasions are almost unknown. Consider the Dublin Declaration, written and signed by a select panel of the Committee on Excellence in Maternal Healthcare. And in any event, such cases have little bearing on the vast majority of abortions (to the nearest whole number, 0% of UK abortions fall into this category according to the official statistics [see 4.7]).
5. ‘Abortion has to be allowable in the case of rape or incest.’ Of course, these are appalling situations which raise challenging and very individual legal and pastoral concerns. However, we need to consider that abortion may in fact add to the trauma. One of my friends was the result of her mother’s rape and she is a remarkable woman and church leader. Think of it this way: if we wouldn’t put a new-born baby to death because of the crime of their father, why would we put the same baby to death a few weeks earlier, when he or she is still in the womb? Is it our location or age that grants us a right to life.  
6. ‘The discovery of life-threatening conditions in the unborn demands an abortion.’ Again such situations are uncommon (1.5% of abortions in England and Wales in 2020 were due to a ‘substantial risk that if the child were born it would suffer from such physical or mental abnormalities as to be seriously handicapped’ [source: 4.7]. Personally, I regularly meet with people with a range of disabilities and I can’t remember anyone saying, ‘I wish I’d been aborted.’ In an age when all those with disability are, quite correctly, treated with respect and support, I think we need to honour the greatest of all rights: the right to live. But there is more to be said here. We have developed a culture in which we celebrate physical perfection and babies are aborted because they fail to meet the standards of our age. As Christians we must challenge that. Equally, too, we must realise that children with additional needs who are carried to full term have implications for individuals, churches and societies. Surely every pregnancy must be a supported pregnancy? That support may be in financial terms, or in a guarantee of adoption. It may be costly and it may well be long term. Consider the case of an unborn baby with a genetic defect that will require lifelong support. In the UK that support is, at least in theory, guaranteed by the Health Service. But in the States any parent(s) would face crippling costs. That burden must be underwritten.

Words can be cheap; we need to be prepared to match them with action lest we fall foul of the warning of James 2:16: ‘If one of you says . . . “Go, I wish you well; keep warm and well fed,” but does nothing about his physical needs, what good is it?’

Abortion poses hard questions and demands honest answers. May God grant us wisdom and grace to respond rightly.