Tomorrow is Martin Luther King, Jr. Day and the following day will be an historic inuaguration, the inauguration of President-Elect Barrack Obama. As many political commentators have already pointed out, the symbolism of the event will be striking. Just a day after honoring MLK, we will be welcoming as our commander-in-chief the first African-American president whose political hero and role model has been Abraham Lincoln, the great liberator of the slaves. It will no doubt be a sight to see.
One of the major reasons cited for Obama’s victory in 2008 was his stated concern for changing injustices here in the United States and around the world. We’ll see how he and his administration seek to do this, but what is incredibly striking to me is the absolute lack of talk of fixing the injustice of the widespread murder of (unborn) children here in the United States. In fact, even as he talks about working against injustice around the world, he seems to be working for this particular injustice through his positions on abortion. (See Obama on Abortion.)
What is more striking and alarming to me is that many Christians seem to have abandoned fighting for the unborn in order to carry the torch for the global poor and other injustices. On the one hand, I give thanks that these global issues are becoming increasingly important for the Christian church; however, on the other hand, many are blatantly seeking to remove the speck out of the nations’ eyes while we in the United States continue to stumble about with the plank of abortion in our own eye.
There are numerous Bible passages that call us to care for the weak – whether they be poor, widowed, fatherless, or voiceless. A nation and a church is marked by how well it cares for its weakest members. This was the sin of church in the 18th and 19th centuries in helping defend the enslaving of thousands of black people; this was the sin of the 20th century church in helping perpetuate systems that intentionally kept African-Americans down in society; the sin of the 21st century church will be to not care for the weakest, most vulnerable members of our society – the unborn children! My pastor recently quoted Jim Wallis, from Sojourners, stating that we ought to care for the “poor not because they are more honorable, but because they are more vulnerable.” I think the logic then ought to go to defend the MOST vulnerable – the unborn children.
Michael Gerson, a wise political commentator at the Washington Post, wrote a very nice piece showing the apparent incompatibility of the Democrat’s s0-called concern for the weakest members of our society and their their strident support of pro-choice polices. Let me quote an excerpt:
“Abortion is an unavoidable moral issue. It also has broader political significance. Democrats of a past generation — the generation of Hubert Humphrey and Martin Luther King Jr. – spoke about building a beloved community that cared especially for the elderly, the weak, the disadvantaged and the young.
The advance of pro-choice policies imported a different ideology into the Democratic Party — the absolute triumph of individualism. The rights and choices of adults have become paramount, even at the expense of other, voiceless members of the community.”
Obama ran on the strong promise: ”Change we can believe in.” I say let’s see the change. Let it be that the Democratic Party no longer defends the status quo of Roe v. Wade and the flippant culture of abortion that it promotes. Let it be that a Democratic president with an overwhelmingly Democratic Congress truly does seek to change. Let it be that we CHANGE our nation’s position on abortion.
That’s “change I can believe in!”
