Truth Is [Coming]

I am embarking on a dangerous mission.  I am going to talk about abortion.

Today, evidently, is Sanctity of Life Sunday.  The day where Christians rally around the “rights” of the “unborn” and protect “babies” from being “killed.”  I use quotations not to insult them or show that I disagree; this is simply the rhetoric that the church tends to use.

Now, before I proceed I should state this.  I am pro-life.

That’s right.  But perhaps it would help that I clarify what this means.  I have found that Shane Claiborne’s definition of the term is the most fitting.  I believe that life does not end at birth (or the third trimester for that matter).

I feel that the church today has said both good and bad things within the conversation on abortion.  For one, the idea that life is a gift from God is good.  Obviously.  And so children should also be seen as a gift from God.  The church has promoted this idea, and I applaud that.  And I think Jesus would say the same thing.

But there is another area of this conversation where the church, I feel, has been a little… immature.

It’s seen in the phrases “killing babies” and “good thing your mom was pro-life” (which sounds a little bit like a “your mom” joke).

The issue here is not a matter of political correctness, or factual integrity.  It’s an issue of rhetoric.

Sure.  Pro-lifers might be correct.  A life is being prevented.  But this is not the debate.  And I feel very strongly that the church needs to wake up and realize this.  Nobody that considers themselves “pro-choice” is really a proponent of killing children (well, maybe that’s a bit of an extreme; I shouldn’t say nobody).  They’re not going to the voting booth hoping for more abortions and more pregnant teens (which reminds me of a very funny Brian Regan bit about tasering 7-year-olds).

So riddle me this: when a Lifer goes up to a Choicy and says, “Why are you killing babies?”, do you expect an intelligent conversation to take place?  Do you expect those two people to arrive in a more healthy relationship?  Do you expect the problem of abortion to be more accurately assessed and analyzed?

No.  Here’s what will happen every single time:

Lifer: “Why are you killing babies?”

Choicy: “I’m not killing babies.  I just feel that there are certain circumstances where a woman should be able to make decisions with regards to her body.”

Lifer: “But what about the baby?  Doesn’t it have rights?”

Choicy: “Well it’s not a baby for starters.”

Lifer: “Yes it is.  Life begin at conception.”

Choicy: “No it doesn’t.  It…”

You get the picture.  It’s the same old thing.  The same old arguments back and forth.

The real problem here is that Lifer and Choicy aren’t talking about the same things.  Lifer’s talking about a human life that God has designed.  Choicy is talking about the personal rights of a woman (among other things of course – obviously, I’ve abbreviated the issue quite a bit).

Let me get to it: I know that there are a number of people who do not fall into one of these categories perfectly.  And chances are that I misrepresented what everyone believes in one way or another.  But here is something that I understand quite well.  There are many people in my life – people that I know names of, and their kids, and what kind of clothes they wear, and their quirky habits – that are pro-life, and while I want to agree with them when they state so proudly that we need to stop Obama from killing babies, I can’t help but cringe because they sound so stupid and they are acting like 6-year-olds with their ears plugged and are shouting and singing at the top of their lungs so as not to hear what their foolish opponent might have to say and disagree about.

I really do want to agree with them.  I don’t like the idea of teenagers getting the idea in their heads that sex is whatever and has no consequences.  I don’t like the emotional and psychological damages that women go through after having abortions.

But after watching pro-life video after video, and hearing political plugs prayer after prayer, I’m sick of it and I want to be pro-choice (which doesn’t sound too bad according to the name in my opinion; it’s like life v. freedom to me).  And after seeing the way that Christians, “people of love,” behave in political discussions, I want to stop being a Christian.  Because it does not look like Christ.  It is not biblical.  Yea sure your voting is fine.  But what about that verse in 2nd Timothy that says to deal with your opponents gently?  Or what about when Jesus said to love your Choicy neighbor?

This is not a call for the church to change her views.  This is a call for the church to engage in intelligent discussion with people that disagree with her.  This is a call for the church to really believe that life is so incredibly valuable that it demands sacrifice.  I think Mother Teresa believed this when she’d go to a teenage girl considering an abortion and say to her, “Let me take your baby.”  I think Choicy would respond a little better if Lifer wasn’t a jerk.  And maybe some day there might be this sort of relationship that develops.  And then who knows?  Some communication might actually happen and we might actually start making progress on this mess of a world we’re in.

But what do I know?  I’m just a non-partisan kid whose too liberal for the conservatives and too God-fearing for the liberals.

I’ve grown up in a very conservative and fundamentalist church.  Which is fine.  Don’t get me wrong.

A lot of people like that.  It’s very attractive to certain people.  And that’s good.  People should be attracted to church.

But a problem is raised.  What about people who aren’t attracted to that church?  Do they not get saved?  Are they out of luck?

I use my church as an example, and perhaps my church is not the best normal, average example of a conservative church, but it is what I am used to.  And even if this is not true of most churches, it is at least true of some churches.

At my church, family is important.  As it should be.  Absolutely.  We had a very difficult time separating the kids from their parents during the Sunday morning service so that they could go to Kid’s Worship as we call it.  The parents wanted to model worship for their children.  And quite frankly, I think that’s refreshing.  I like that.  It is the right attitude.  Parents want their children by their side as they sing and pray and learn.  I do not criticize this desire in any way.  Sunday, the new Sabbath, has become about family for my church.  And I sincerely believe that there is much good in that.

You could say that my church is very family-friendly.

Recently, my views on some things have changed.  You could say that my perspective became a bit broader.  A little less right-winged.  My eyes were opened a little wider.  Whatever you prefer.  Some family-friendly church members might even go so far as to say I began becoming liberal (which can be quite a travesty to some – as I am getting to).

Now, as anyone with a pulse knows, there are some hot-button issues in the evangelical world.  One is called “homosexuality”.  You know how it goes.

I have heard much conversation over this issue in my church.  And there seems to be two main categories.  For example, the first side sounds like this:

Homosexuality is wrong.  Homosexuals are evil and dishonor God.  They should not be allowed in our church and influencing our children.

For a long time, I thought this was the only right view.  Which is another post entirely…  But when my perspective broadened (or whatever phrase you so choose), I became very hostile to this attitude.  It angered me when people in my church discussed homosexuality.  And then there was the second view:

Living a homosexual lifestyle is wrong.  If an openly gay person walked through our doors, we would absolutely want to be welcoming and loving toward him or her, but we would want to guide them toward the right path.

This view was much less offensive to me to say the least.  But the bottom line I came to realize was that these openly gay people are still not wanted in my church.  Yes, we would “lovingly accept them,” but what if they were increasingly “flamboyant” (I have sadly heard these words uttered in the sanctuary)?

And it dawned on me that the concern was the children.  What if this person comes and negatively impacts our children?

Now I am not a parent in any way, shape, or form, but even I can sympathize with #1 people here.  What about the delicate minds of your kids?  It’s a legitimate question.

I eventually came to a realization:

My church is family-friendly.  It’s rated G and very much so (PG on the rare Sundays involving discussions on sex and marriage).  Their primary responses to alternative lifestyles are influenced first and foremost by the impact they make on their children.  And as I stated earlier and I’ll mention again, I understand this completely.

But because families are concerned for their children, my church has had to compromise: the people who struggle the hardest with things like homosexuality, child molestation, drug addiction, etc. must be turned away ultimately.

And while I fully understand and sympathize with the views of my family-friendly church, I’m not okay with them.  I cannot in my sane mind advertise for a church that turns people away at the door.

I want a church that isn’t forced to compromise.  I want a church that doesn’t have to be about “families” if “families” are keeping people from the Kingdom of God.  I want a church that doesn’t have country club membership.