The Misguided Move among Evangelicals to Vote for Pro-Choice Candidates (long)

How prevalent it really is I do not know but there is a move afloat in evangelical circles to legitimize voting for pro-choice candidates most notably Biden for president. For as long as I can remember, voting for a pro-choice candidate was anathema in Southern Baptist churches. Although not Southern Baptist this approach was recently expressed by John MacArthur:

quote:

---

The pastor then explained that he and the president “talked a little bit about why, certainly from a biblical standpoint, Christians could not vote Democratic.”
“There’s no way that a Christian can affirm the slaughter of babies, homosexual activity, homosexual marriage, or any kind of gross immorality,” MacArthur asserted.
“No way we could stand behind a candidate who was affirming transgender behavior, which of course is really the ‘reprobate mind’ of Romans 1.”

---

LINK

But this bedrock of pro-life support for the unborn is being eroded. And IMO, pro-life is not the only voting issue but it is a prerequisite for my vote.
Here's some examples of what I mean:

1) Bart Barber-Dwight Mcksissic Interview. This article juxtaposes one pastor endorsing Trump and one Biden and gives legitimacy to both.

2) Skye Jethani Twitter (endorsed by Phil Vischer , the creator of Veggie Tales)

3) SBC Voices articles:
a. I Don't See How a Christian Could Vote for
b. Anti-Abortion as Divine Permission for Christian Hatred Misogyny and Racism

IMO, here's how/why:
1) To form a unity with 'black' evangelicals and provide cover for their support of Democrat candidates.
2) Because the meaning of "abortion" is no longer baby murdering. Now it's an abstract concept or a statistic.
3) By introducing a (misguided) "pro all life" concept.

Before going further, let me define "evangelical" in its traditional sense. An evangelical is someone is who: a) affirms the inspiration, infallibility, and authority of the Bible, b) the Bible is the final authority for all matters of faith and practice, and c) salvation by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone.

More Detailed Discussion
1) To form a unity with 'black' evangelicals and provide cover for their support of Democrat candidates.

Black evangelicals have long supported Democrat candidates. Although they would affirm a pro-life position, they appear to have few reservations about supporting either pro-choice candidates or pro-choice platforms. But the great sin of today is supposedly racism or systemic racism. So white evangelicals in a pursuit of unity with brothers and sisters of color, are now publishing justification for support of pro-choice candidates lest they be viewed as unwitting proponents of systemic racism.

2) Because the meaning of "abortion" is no longer baby murdering. Now it's an abstract concept or a statistic.

When people write articles trying to justify support for pro-choice candidates, they invariably speak of abortion as something less than other than the horrific evil act of brutally murdering one of God's image bearers.

For example, read the Skye Jethani series of twitter posts. Does it read as if it is actually addressing baby murder? Now substitute any other violent practice, e.g., rape or murder or child molestation. Are these to be only managed? Or shouldn't they always be illegal. I mean if the number of slaves is decreasing under pro-slavery candidates, let's keep electing them until the number of slaves is reduced to our acceptable threshold.? (sarcasm)

Holiness and the image of God do not depend on stats. There is no acceptable threshold for baby-murdering. As far as I can tell, the Bible does not promote societies that are allowed some quota of violence.

3) By introducing a (misguided) "pro all life" concept.

On occasion, one will hear the phrase "pro-life from womb to tomb." On its surface I would readily ascribe to such. Yes, the sanctity of life latent in God's image bearers should be respected from beginning to end. But what this means when one delves into its current usage is that it equates many social issues as (im)moral equivalents with abortion. For example, one black SBC pastor from TX wrote this: "Systemic injustice & qualified immunity are the equivalent of pro-life issues, if you are a victim of either, which many minorities are."

I consider myself a pro-lifer. We have 2 hands and 24 hours. I/we would gladly eliminate every vestige of injustice till moons shall wax and wane no more. But we have long held that abortion is the mother lode of all social evils. If we bypass this, practically speaking, is there any moral issue left?

Are there other social ills? Yes. But ,most 'victims' of other forms of injustice do not rush out and commit suicide. They choose to continue living. The victims of abortion are afforded no such option. It's a very small people who find their solution to social issues through baby murdering.

Finally, I don't think we have ever been so close to making baby murdering illegal as we are now. And to see other trying to steal defeat from the jaws of victory is deflect to other and lesser issues is frustrating and infuriating.

One does not have to vote for any candidate. But spare me your hollow arguments supporting pro -baby murder candidates.