Why are churches only talking about freedom as it relates to abortion?

By David McElroy · February 15, 2012

Here’s a pop quiz. Who said this in the last week: “It’s not about contraception. It’s about economic liberty; it’s about freedom of speech; it’s about freedom of religion. It’s about government control of your lives and it’s got to stop.”

It sounds like someone taking a principled stand against government dictating to people, doesn’t it? It sounds as though it could have come from a libertarian, even. But it didn’t. Those words were said by GOP presidential candidate Rick Santorum in response to the Obama administration’s mandate that every employer (including churches) pay for contraception. Does this mean he’s changed his mind about everything?

The people who are talking big about individual liberty when it comes to not paying for contraception forget all about those fine words when it comes to other things. Santorum was a big supporter of the Patriot Act and thinks that government intrusion into our lives is just fine in other areas. He’s a typical social conservative who wants to impose his views on everyone, but when it comes to government doing something he doesn’t like, he piously intones the rhetoric of freedom. Why?

I heard a Catholic bishop being interviewed on Fox News last week, but I didn’t catch his name. The bishop blasted the Obama administration’s mandate that every employer — including church agencies — provide insurance coverage for contraception. He said this was a violation of their religious freedom, yet he made sure to point out that the Catholic church was completely in favor of forcing everyone to buy health insurance. They just didn’t want to be forced to be the coverage they don’t want.

In other words, the Catholic church believes that other people should be forced to buy what they don’t want. There’s apparently no violation of freedom in that. But the church shouldn’t be forced to buy what it doesn’t want to buy. That’s a violation of liberty. In other words, the Catholic church position is just as hypocritical as that of Santorum.

I’m in complete agreement with Santorum and the various churches who are opposing the Obama administration about this policy, but I’d like to know why it’s taken them this long to speak up for freedom. Why have they suddenly discovered that it’s a violation of conscience to be forced to pay for something when it happens to hit upon one of their hot-button issues?

I’m happy that leaders in other church groups are speaking out about the insurance issue. As I reported last week, the head of the Southern Baptist Convention’s agency dealing with government affairs said that Southern Baptist agencies will not comply with the law. He said that Christians are going to go to jail rather than obey. I learned Tuesday that the president of the conservative Lutheran Church Missouri Synod released a statement expressing sharp concern about the administration’s position and saying that it’s unacceptable.

I’m happy that these churches and others are noticing the conflict between obeying government and having the liberty to pursue their religious beliefs, but I’d like to know why they only discover this when it comes to abortion. Why aren’t they offended by their members’ money being taken without consent and used to kill people around the world? Why aren’t they offended by a criminal justice system that makes a mockery of its use of the word “justice”? Why aren’t they as concerned about freedom of conscience to raise and educate children as we see fit, instead of being forced to pay for government-run systems that don’t work well and that brainwash kids into being loyal servants of the coercive state?

I’m opposed to abortion and don’t want a nickel of my money being used for it, but tax money has been used for years to fund abortions. If we’re willing to risk going to jail over a mandate to buy health insurance that covers Plan B and other forms of contraception, why aren’t we willing to risk going to jail over withholding tax money that’s being used to kill people already — both born and unborn?

I don’t want to see churches involved in electoral politics, because I don’t want to encourage anyone to do that. I also obviously don’t favor any kind of theocracy or having churches dictate public policy to everyone. But I think there’s a strong case to be made that the church leaders who are making noises right now about contraception and abortion need to find the backbone to teach their members about the morality of civil disobedience when it comes to allowing our money to be used for destructive ends, both at home and around the world.

The Catholic church is at least the nominal home of about 68.5 million Americans. The Southern Baptist Convention is the country’s largest Protestant denomination, with about 16.2 million members, mostly concentrated in the conservative South. If just those two bodies could discover the courage to be consistent about the morality of the right of individual conscience, how much difference could it make? How much difference could it make if other church bodies discovered the same thing?

Most libertarians and anarchists aren’t Christians and they’re pretty disdainful of Christians, historically. But the American church is the greatest “mission field” for libertarians and anarchists today. While the Gospels don’t prescribe any particular form of government, they’re most consistent with a view that says people shouldn’t be forced to “be good.” (It takes a shallow interpretation of the story of Jesus talking about “rendering unto Caesar” to say that Jesus wanted us to set up coercive governments.)

Sadly, the Catholic church is hypocritical about private conscience and individual rights. The bishops like people being forced to do what they agree with, but they virulently oppose them being forced to do what they don’t agree with. If they could work out the internal contradictions of their position, maybe they could make a difference.

Even church groups which don’t officially endorse coercive government policies need to realize the contradiction of their becoming active about this issue, but remaining silent about the theft and killing that are done every day while they remain silent. I hope they can find the consistency and the courage to deal with the issues honestly and teach their members that it’s a good thing to disobey government when government violates conscience. It’s time for them to teach their members that the statist roads they’re traveling aren’t reflections of what Jesus taught, so it’s time to turn around.

It’s interesting that those who favor abortion and every type of contraception have hung their hat on the word “choice” for all these years. When these groups have talked about the legality of abortion, they have assured us that all they want is for women to have the choice to be able to choose abortions or contraception of any kind. Now that these same people support forcing everyone to pay for these services — whether they want them or not — it’s clear that their position is a lie. They don’t want choice. They want government policy to reflect their own views.

And that’s the problem on both sides. The churches talk about freedom when it comes to the insurance issue. The pro-abortion forces talk about freedom when it comes to women being able to choose abortions. Both sides are hypocritical in some ways. If abortion is going to be legal, every individual should have the right — at the very least — to choose for himself whether to participate in this system of destroying unborn children.

It’s time for American churches to look seriously at their ethics and understand that their silence on the horrors being perpetrated by the U.S. government is tacit approval. Jesus was never shy about condemning evil, even when evil was popular and powerful. We shouldn’t be shy about emulating Him.

Share on Social Networks

I’m seeing a lot of simplistic and dishonest explanations right now for the current rioting in France. Those on the populist far right claim it’s all about Muslim immigrants to France disrupting the culture. Their message is that this sort of thing is going to happen in the U.S. unless “we defend the border.” On the far left, socialists and their fellow travelers claim the riots are all about wealthy people in France not paying enough taxes, resulting in cuts to government services. The truth is far more complicated, but it’s rooted in the decline of population growth in Europe. There simply aren’t enough young workers paying into the tax system anymore, so cuts in social services were inevitable. There is genuine cultural tension as more and more people immigrate from other countries, but government cuts to education and other services are even more important to what’s happening. The situation is complicated, so don’t let dishonest people with U.S. political agendas tell you that it happens to support whatever they were already promoting for partisan reasons.

Here’s another reason to appreciate the cats in your life: New research involving 93 countries found that places with more cats per person also tended to have happier people. The researchers say the finding fits with previous evidence that living with pets can reduce loneliness and stress while providing companionship, emotional attachment and social support. The study doesn’t prove that cats cause greater happiness, but it certainly adds to the evidence that sharing your home — and your life — with a cat might be good for you.

The company that owns Facebook and Instagram is heavily promoting its new AI-based software assistant called Muse, but people who are using it as it was designed are incredibly foolish. An early adopter of the software discovered that a few days ago when he advertised an item for sale on Facebook Marketplace — and he inadvertently gave Muse full authority to act on his behalf. The software agreed to a lowball offer made by another Facebook user and then gave that man the home address of the man for whom he was an agent. The software told the buyer that the seller was home and waiting for him. When the buyer showed up and waited angrily, the would-be buyer left an angry review for the man. And this angry man had the seller’s home address. It was only well after that that the software reported what it had done and admitted it had made a mistake. I won’t be putting that much power into the hands of any software. I think anyone who agrees to such terms is a fool. And the software’s user agreement says you’re responsible for purchases the software makes in your name. Nope.

Meet my new girlfriend. Her name is Meg. And she’s my little sweetheart. A couple of months ago, a neighbor across the street told me about a new stray in the neighborhood that she and I were both soon feeding. The cat had been very skittish about contact and she had a lot of scabs and parasites in her fur, but a trip to the vet last week revealed that she was otherwise in good health. The vet estimates her to be 1 to 2 years old. I named her for Meg Murry, the 13-year-old protagonist of Madeleine L’Engle’s wonderful book, “A Wrinkle in Time.” (Please read the book. Don’t watch the horrible movie.) Since we lost Lucy almost a year ago, it seems appropriate that we finally have a new little girl to join the household. She’s already captured my heart, but Alex, Oliver and Sam aren’t there quite yet.

There’s nothing socially acceptable that’s as dangerous as drinking alcohol. Most people grow up being told to “drink responsibly” — and all of us see people abusing this drug in one way or another — but the truth is that drinking alcohol is always a terrible risk. The alcohol in these drinks is toxic and the human liver has to work hard to filter the toxins out. What most people don’t realize is that alcohol is classified as a known carcinogen by the World Health Organization — because of the well-established connection between imbibing and various cancers. Many people have taken refuge behind the idea that light or moderate drinking might be safe, but a new study shows that drinking even one drink a day increases the risks of 10 types of cancer. When I was a teen-ager, I looked around and saw the negative effects that this behavior had on a lot of people and decided not to start drinking, so I’ve never even tried this poison. The evidence keeps piling up that I was lucky to have come to that conclusion early.

Related Posts