The Political Polarization of Abortion

The nomination process for Supreme Court justices begins with the departure of a sitting member of the high court, whether by retirement or death. It is then up to the president of the United States to nominate a replacement to the court, and the U.S. Senate to vet and confirm his choice. The nomination process for Supreme Court justices is among the most important obligations on presidents and members of the Senate, in part because members of the court are appointed for life. They don’t get second chances to make the right choice.

The overturning of Roe v. Wade announced this week was the result of Supreme Court Justices Amy Coney Barrett, Neil M. Gorsuch and Brett M. Kavanaugh (all appointed by President Donald Trump) joining with Justices Samuel A. Alito Jr. and Clarence Thomas to make the majority vote. The current conservative majority vote used to overturn this ruling was the result of the manipulation of the constitutional process by then Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell holding one appointment in abeyance while the Obama administration expired and accelerating another appointment while the Trump administration expired. McConnell reversed his justification each time to contrive the desired outcome of two appointments in a Republican administration when the choice should have been relegated to Democratic administrations as was customary up until McConnell’s manipulation of the process. Let me state that there was no violation of the constitutional process, McConnell simply exploited a vague area of that process that had been time honored by all administrations up until that point.

This was a complicated issue about which even the justices themselves seemed conflicted at times. Justice Alito who wrote the overturning opinion was quoted as saying, “We cannot allow our decisions to be affected by any extraneous influences such as concern about the public’s reaction to our work.” Obviously, Justice Alito is referring to the clear majority of Americans who are in favor of freedom of choice. Justice Roberts wrote “The Court’s decision to overturn Roe and Casey is a serious jolt to the legal system – regardless of how you view those cases. A narrower decision rejecting the misguided viability line would be markedly less unsettling, and nothing more is needed to decide this case.” It is clear the majority of the justices didn’t agree with this opinion because the majority vote elected the extreme measure of reversing Roe. (Note quotes from “Emboldened Supreme Court majority takes big swings right off the bench” by Robert Barnes, Page A1, Washington Post, Sunday, June 26, 2022.)

Pictured above is an illustration of the anticipated legislative actions either ongoing or expected to soon start as a result of the recent Supreme Court reversal on abortion. The picture clearly illustrates the political polarization and the emphatic division of our nation into blue and red, pro-life and pro-choice states. This political polarization has not been caused over the issue of abortion, but the division has been made greater and more volatile with the politicization of the abortion issue, dividing faith communities in the process.

I am personally against abortion and have written extensively about my migration from it being the single issue driving my political choices for many years to where I am today. (See outline of “The Evidence of Things Unseen”.) That is, being free from the burden of supporting the political party that uses the evangelical vote to support their political agenda through their anti-abortion rhetoric. I have learned from years of ministry and pastoring in various denominations of the evangelical community of faith that many devoted Christians have a different view of when life begins and that I cannot superimpose my view on theirs if they in fact differ. Moreover, I have learned that carrying signs of an aborted fetus does nothing to convince someone who has a different position to consider changing his or her mind. It wasn’t until I confronted my own hypocrisy in this area that I was able to move from a dogmatic, rigid position on this subject to a position of grace and acceptance of anyone regardless of their experience and position on it.

I have come to realize that the manipulation of this one issue by the political process in our nation has contributed greatly to the division that exists today in the evangelical communities of faith. While pastoring, I encountered evangelical Christians who have had abortions or who have been complicit in an abortion decision, who shared their silent struggle recovering from the emotional and spiritual wounding that sometimes is associated with an abortion. In these instances, public arguments pro and con abortion stir all kinds of emotions, self-doubt, and confusion of faith. In the past few weeks alone, I have had separate discussions with two close members of my family who are devoted to their particular denomination of the evangelical community who have expressed deep animus and in one instance used the word “hate” towards either a current or past Democratic president. When asked why the word “hate” was used it could not be explained except by saying “I just do'”. We evangelicals have been driven far into our respective polarized political corners to a point where we cannot have a meaningful discussion over the many perplexing issues that divide our country without becoming defensive and hostile towards one another. This is a complex social issue of our times that cannot be adequately dealt with by sweeping it under a legal carpet by the Supreme Court. Such actions are not going to eliminate abortions. This type of legal window dressing will simply put the wellbeing of more women at risk with no additional accountability for men. As a result, the argument will grow stronger and louder on each side of the issue and the divide in our country will become greater. The hypocrisy here is that it is the opposite argument used by many evangelicals as to why we cannot have restrictions on our gun control. That is, the weapons will be bought anyway, so why bother with making laws against the purchase of guns. In this case, evangelicals welcome additional laws limiting abortions when in reality it will do nothing to stop abortions from happening. Women will continue to seek the help they need regardless of any legal constraints.

I am not a prophet or a biblical scholar, but I have been in my faith walk long enough and am familiar enough with my bible to recognize the only thing that causes a divide of this nature in people has nothing to do with God, Jesus Christ or the Spirit of God. It has everything to do with everything that is anti- God, Christ and the Spirit of God. “Pursue righteousness, faith, love and peace, with those who call on the Lord from a pure heart” (2 Timothy 2:22). What has begun in our nation is a series of political events that will continue to divide our nation. Speculation has already begun which social reform will be taken on next by this politicized court. The people of faith must come together and decide that we have more in common than we do in our differences. If we cannot demonstrate an ability to come together, for the sake of our country, than who can? No political effort can unite our country because the ultimate goal of any political party is to control. We are a people of faith that should be bound together by the Spirit of God, that is true liberty. “Now the Lord is the Spirit; and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is Liberty” (2 Corinthians 3:17). People of faith, let’s all be liberals in that regard and come together, agree to disagree, for the sake of our country.