Evidentialism, Abortion, and Total Depravity

This is going to be a brief post.  I don’t intend to go in depth, just to share some thoughts on the Christian’s use of evidence for conviction of sin, in this post more specifically, abortion. Listen to one of the voices for “reproductive justice” answer five questions about her abortion.

Let’s analyze the questions and answers:

  1. How many weeks pregnant were you when you had your abortion?     Other than the fact she is smiling all throughout the video, notice the matter of fact way she speaks of her 9 1/2 week-old baby, even after seeing an ultrasound.  We must remember as Christians that evidences for the evil of abortion, while they are great, mean nothing to an unregenerate, dead, stony and depraved heart like Ms. Stack’s.  Even an ultrasound did not change her mind at all.
  2. What kind of abortion procedure did you have done?    Listen carefully to this one.

    “The abortion procedure I had done was a simple suction/vaccum/aspiration.  It took about four minutes….It was quite easy, quite painless.”

    No big deal, right?  Just a simple violent dismembering of the baby by suction.  Nothing to see here, move along.  Notice the entire time there is no discussion about the baby, obviously because anti-life advocates do not consider a baby outside of the womb a baby (although people like Gosnell took abortion to its logical and consistent end), so the entire focus is on her and her comfort.  She speaks of it as a matter-of-fact event, sort of like going to a fast food restaurant, ordering, paying, getting your food, and leaving.  The interesting here thing is that she KNOWS what procedure was used.  Ms. Stack is not an ignorant individual.  She goes around college campuses advocating “reproductive justice.”  Take that into consideration when thinking of how you would share the Gospel and the evil of abortion with her.  No matter how many evidences you give, even if she was moved, it would only be emotions and nothing solid.  She later says, “One day I may regret it but for now I can honestly say I really don’t regret it.”  One day she may regret it, but the next she might not.  And so on and so forth.  “He loves me, he loves me not” kind of thing.

  3. Did it hurt?    Again, forget about the baby.  Think like an unbeliever advocate of abortion.  What baby?  Oh, you mean that blob of tissue?  It’s not human!  Don’t expect unbelievers to think the same way you do.  Engage them as rebels against God and His law, especially people like Ms. Stack.  Listen again to the answer she gives.  The most painful part of the procedure was getting her IV through her veins.  For that she actually cried.  Forget about the fact she was murdering a human being, that’s not worth even shedding a tear for.

    “After [the procedure] there were no real side effects or feelings [smile].”

    Shuddering yet?  Pretty face, evil heart.  Evil, dead heart, that is.  Nothing but the Gospel can change her mind about this, no matter how many evidences you may give to people like her.

  4. Do you regret it?     Let’s see what Ms. Stack has to say, “I don’t regret it.  I don’t know why, but I don’t.  I think it was the most ethical and humane thing for all parties involved.  So I think I have no reason to regret that particular decision.” Including the baby?  Was the baby one of the “parties involved”?  Or are you also an “anti-choicer” with respect to the baby’s will?  Wouldn’t the most “ethical and humane” thing to do be think before you pull your pants down at least of who to give the baby in adoption to?  If you’re for “reproductive justice,” well, haven’t you denied the baby the ability to reproduce in the future?  Who’s the “anti-choicer” now? Why is it that abortion advocates propose one single “ethical and humane” solution, that being the suctioning, hacking, or incineration of a human being?  I had a classmate tell me the following,

    “Abortion is the most humane thing to do.  Adoption is the most repulsive and inhumane option to choose.”

    This was the same person who almost teared up at the mention of child abuse.  Unregenerate minds will gladly adopt inconsistency and blatant error if it means they can consciously, willingly, and gladly suppress the truth of their being accountable to God (Romans 1).  As Christians, we need to change the approach that evidence will move the heart.  Evidence may stir up the conscience for a bit, but apart from the preaching of the Gospel by the authoritative Word of God and the work of the Spirit, it is pointless. Another thing she brought up in this same question was usual pro-life argumentation given to try to convict a woman of her sin of abortion,

    “‘One day you will have a baby and you will realize what you did to the other baby, that you’re a murderer,’ but, to be honest, I’ve never felt any regret about it.  I don’t know, maybe I will someday, but I can say, with certainty, that I do not regret my abortion.”

    Many Christians use the argumentation given in documentaries like Living Waters’ “180,” that, without opening Scripture, we should employ Reason (capital R) in convincing people that abortion is murder.  Seems like quite an appealing and strong case, but as I pointed before, the unbelieving mind cannot be expected to act consistently upon their conscience.  Remember, they have already “exchanged the truth for a lie,” they can and will do so again unless God regenerates their heart.  Ms. Stack here has no problem dismissing this argument and living day by day probably without any regret (yes, that’s how depraved human beings are.  That’s the whole point of the cross.) My friend Chris made a video two years ago addressing in a much better way my disagreement with documentaries like 180.  I admire the effort and work my brothers in Living Waters put into sharing the Gospel, and I pray God gives me that boldness as well.  I just can’t agree with the method employed there and in their Gospel presentation  Scripture, God’s revelation, must reign supreme, not man’s Reason.  (Do you “reason” with people?  Of course you do.  But in reasoningreason must be subservient and subject to Scripture, not Scripture to Reason.) Please watch my friend’s video below:

  5. If you found out you were pregnant again, RIGHT NOW, would you have another abortion?    Let’s hear what Ms. Stack has to say,

“I would probably cry.  That’s what I would do first.  But I would also probably really consider abortion.  I don’t know that I can say for sure that I would do it again, not because there’s anything wrong with it, just because I’m kind of a different person and now I’m in a different place than I was two years ago.  I will say that I think it’s kind of arrogant for people to say they do know for sure what they would do when faced with an unplanned pregnancy.  You don’t know what you’re doing until you’re in that situation.  That feeling of, “Oh, my God, I’m pregnant.”  That is something you cannot possibly speculate as to how you would respond.  So I think I would definitely consider an abortion, and I think it’s likely that I would choose to have one just because of where I am right now and the goals that I have.  I can’t say for sure [smile].”

Okay.  So the main reason why she chose and would again get an abortion is because the baby would be a hindrance to where she is in life.  It would hinder her from achieving her goals.  Again, notice the inconsistency.  What if she already had a baby and suddenly her goals and place in life changed?  Would she “definitely consider” murdering her already born child?  Gotta get rid of the hindrance, right?  It doesn’t matter if it’s unborn or already born, a hindrance is a hindrance.  I do not think that abortion advocates actually believe their own argument.  Ultimately, I think that abortion is an excuse to engage in sexual promiscuity wherever, whenever, with whoever, however they want.  The baby is just an accident, an “unplanned pregnancy,” that obstacle keeping them from their goals (one of them being able to have sex without accountability to God or man).  If she had watched 180 but she considered her goals and place in life and how the baby would be a hindrance, what would stop her from getting an abortion?  God has given unbelievers over to their sin because they exchanged the truth of God for a lie (Romans 1).  Don’t be surprised by the argumentation given by people like Katie Stack.  The reason we are all still alive is because God restrains some people in mankind from being as evil and as depraved as they could be.  We shouldn’t be surprised about the Gosnells of the world.  Apart from the grace of God, that would be us.


Or what about an ordained Baptist minister (Unitarian, by the way, not surprising) who performs late-term abortions (up to six months pregnant)?

“Am I killing?  Yes, I know that….I’m an ordained Baptist minister [smile].”

Need I say any more?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s