Choose Ye This Day

When will we stop the practice of sacrificing our children to the god of self?

Yesterday, the Supreme Court of the United States struck down a Louisiana law regulating abortion clinics, thus reasserting a commitment to protecting what some call a woman’s right to terminate her pregnancy. The Louisiana law mirrored a law considered in a 2016 case of which the court struck down from the state of Texas. The law, among other things, required that the physician on staff at any abortion clinic have hospital admittance rights. Seems to be a reasonable request of those who want abortion to be legal ‘in case the mother’s life is in danger’. Now, one would logically expect the same outcome if what you’re considering is identical to what you’ve already considered. But all things were not exactly equal. Chief Justice John Roberts actually voted for the 2016 Texas bill and so there was the hope that he would choose life again. And yet he chose procedure (precedent) over substance (doing what is right). He chose the institution of the court over the life of an individual. The case is a disappointment for those who had hoped that Roberts would finally solidify a right leaning court and, more importantly, set the country on course of finally ending infanticide. But in the disappointment, two things ring true again just as they have in every other disappointment regarding abortion and the courts.

One is that the issue of abortion is primarily a moral issue and not a political one. It is an issue that will only ever be eradicated by the collective repudiation of a moral people. Those of us who hold out hope in a political party or a political leader to appoint the right judges who will adjudicate morally will forever be disappointed. That is what we have in the Roberts’ example. Precedent, or what the court has said already, even if it is utterly morally wrong, is what should preside now in making these decisions. It reminds you of the foolish absolutism of the Babylonians and the Meade-Persian empire in setting public policy. It displays a lack of courage and an abandonment of one’s duty to ‘judge’. You simply pass it off to what someone else said years ago. Just as foolish is the hope that one appointment, or one chamber of Congress, or one president is what is needed to end this moral wantonness. One can never hope to change the votes of people unless you change the hearts of people.

Secondly, the practice of abortion is nothing new. Rather, it is simply something NEVER given it’s right definition. That right definition is found in scripture and yet you rarely find a church member speaking about it in those scriptural terms. Abortion, or infanticide as it more accurately should be called, was a sacrament of the religion of those nations driven out of the promised land upon Israel’s arrival. Those nations, as part of their worship of their god Molech, would place their infant children as a sacrifice on a statue of Molech on the flat stone span between Molech’s arms. But just prior to the sacrifice, the span would be heated to an incredibly high temperature from a raging fire underneath the span making it a veritable frying pan. They would offer this sacrifice to please their God, to do his will so that all would go well with them. God commanded of Israel upon their arrival in the land that ANY of the people of Israel or of the strangers who sojourn in Israel who give any of their children to Molech shall surely be put to death. Clearly, it was God’s will that children were not to be sacrificed, not only to a false god (Molech), but they were not required to be sacrificed to God (Yahweh) either (see Issac on Mount Moriah).

Now, as much as those in favor of infanticide want to beatify this scriptural comparative definition of abortion with flowery words of ‘care for the mother’, or, proffer it as a reasonable alternate to an incestuous pregnancy, or, attest it to be an inherent right found somewhere in the Constitution, in the end it remains no different than this ancient practiced sacrament of the past. Only …. it’s no longer the god of Molech they sacrifice to, but the god of SELF instead. It is the modern day sacrament paid to the God of MY SELF who demands that I make things right for MY future and MY career and MY life. And that worship of myself will scarcely be denied by any intrusion of a political system, if they ever had the courage to try.

And yet, still this moral issue continues to be battled out in the political arena as we continue to hold out hope for the right SCOTUS picks, or the right restrictive law from the Assembly or the right president in office. In the end, the church must confront, not a political system, but an immoral people who collectively claim to be 80% Christian according to the latest polls. If we truly are ‘Christian’ as we claim we are, we as a society must be compelled to answer a Christian question. And that question is moral and very simple: “How long will we as a ‘Christian’ people be undecided between two opinions? If the Lord be God, follow Him; but if (Self) be god then follow him.”

%d bloggers like this: