Abortion, the Church and Health Care Reform
As Congress debates health care reform the most divisive issue is not the public option or a single payer style health care system. Unfortunately, abortion has become the defining issue.
People of faith are as divided as the politicians. The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops has pushed for new restrictions on abortion but not all Christians are of the same mind. Most mainline Christian denominations have argued in favor of a woman’s right to make her own reproductive health care choices for decades. The General Synod of the United Church of Christ, for example, has said that “access to safe and legal abortion is consistent with a woman’s right to follow the dictates of her own faith and beliefs in determining when and if she should have children, and it has supported comprehensive sexuality education as one measure to prevent unwanted or unplanned pregnancies, and to create healthy and responsible sexual persons and relationships.”
The 16th General Synod of the United Church of Christ adopted a resolution in 1987 that “affirms the sacredness of all life, and the need to protect and defend human life in particular” and that “encourages persons facing unplanned pregnancies to consider giving birth and parenting the child, or releasing the child for adoption, before abortion.”
As the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice notes, while there are some mentions concerning the termination of pregnancies in the Hebrew Scriptures and the New Testament there are no prohibitions against abortion despite the fact that it was practiced in ancient times (without the benefit of modern medical care and often to the detriment of the health of the woman).
Modern Christians are forced to look beyond Scripture alone for guidance on this and many other issues. Charles Wesley, the founder of Methodism, can be our guide. He argued that Christians should rely on Scripture, tradition, reason, and experience as we seek to be guided by the Holy Spirit in important matters. Unfortunately, the tradition of the church has nearly always been to subjugate women to the wishes of men. It is to the collective benefit of the church universal that women’s voices are now being heard more clearly as ordained ministers and leaders.
Is there room for error in using a Wesleyan theological model for approaching difficult modern social issues? Yes. But there is also clearly room for error in applying Scripture to issues that were not addressed in Scripture. Our modern existence is fraught with such dilemmas and that is why personal choice becomes so important.
The United Methodist Church stated in 2008 that: “Our belief in the sanctity of unborn human life makes us reluctant to approve abortion. But we are equally bound to respect the sacredness of the life and well-being of the mother and the unborn child. We recognize tragic conflicts of life with life that may justify abortion, and in such cases we support the legal option of abortion under proper medical procedures.”
None of this matters, however, to those who see abortion as the taking of a life. Frankly, I can respect those who take this position. It is particularly easy to respect such voices when they apply a consistent “ethic of life” that applies not only to abortion but also to the death penalty and war. Former U.S. Senator Mark Hatfield, a longtime Republican from Oregon who retired from office in 1997, is a Baptist whose experiences as a solider during World War II left him deeply committed to the respect of life. As such, he led efforts in the senate to oppose military spending, to fight the death penalty and to oppose abortion. He earned my vote during his final campaign because I believed in the sincerity of his principles even as I differed with his conclusions regarding abortion.
While I strongly disagree with the attempts by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops to inject abortion into the health care reform debate I respect their right to do so and know that they have taken such steps only after prayerful consideration. At the urging of the bishops and others, an amendment to the health care reform bill now under debate by the senate would add further restrictions against legal abortion. Pro-choice religious leaders countered with a statement today that noted that the “Senate bill is already abortion neutral, an appropriate reflection of the fact that it is intended to serve Americans of many diverse religious and moral views. The bill includes compromise language that maintains current law, prohibiting federal funds from being used to pay for abortion services, while still allowing women the option to use their own private funds to pay for abortion care.” Hopefully, a majority in Congress will support a health care reform bill that rejects any efforts to further restrict access to abortion.
The debate over health care reform should be centered around getting coverage for the 47 million Americans who go without. The National of Council of Churches in Christ USA, with the support of Roman Catholics, Muslims, Jews and Protestants from across the theological spectrum, released a statement earlier this year arguing that health care reform is needed "so that all of our neighbors, especially the people living in poverty, children, and the aged, can be assured of the fullness of life that is central to the holy vision of a beloved and peaceable community." All of our energy should be focused on expanding health care. (Related Link: Health care and the Christian tradition)Before this flair up there was progress made regarding so-called “common ground” proposals that would limit the need for abortion. Just this summer the “Preventing Unintended Pregnancies, Reducing the Need for Abortion and Supporting Pregnant Women and Parents Act" was introduced in the House. This act, which would make “progress toward the shared goal of reducing the need for abortion by preventing unintended pregnancies and supporting pregnant women and families” has support from leading pro-life and pro-choice advocates in the faith community. After all, if a woman feels that she is forced into having an abortion because of economic factors that isn’t really a choice. We should do all that we can as a nation to help women and families. That’s a conversation I want to return to once health care reform has been completed.
