The Icy Slopes of Mandating a Death Option

The United States of America has prided itself on being a country of freedom; that is, after all, a founding principle of our nation. Throughout the years this principle has (hopefully) served as a matrix through which our government has evaluated its decisions. And where fundamental freedoms have been encroached upon, reversal of such encroachment has been pursued, citing unconstitutionality. Alarmingly, a subtle yet potent encroachment on a fundamental freedom has recently been sealed into law.

On Friday, January 20, 2012, the Office of the President announced that religious institutions will be required to comply with the Affordable Care Act, which ensures the availability of all government-approved forms of contraception with no co-pay to those offered most employer health plans, including those provided by Church-run institutions such as universities and hospitals (Albert Mohler, “The Briefing,” January 23, 2012). If you are familiar with the nature of FDA-appoved contraceptives, you probably see the issue immediately. For those who are not up-to-speed on the nature of the matter, what has happened is that the Affordable Care Act requires employee health plans to include cost-free contraceptive methods, including chemical contraceptives such as “the pill,” IUDs, as well as the “morning after pill.” But these forms of contraception are not actually contraception at all: They are abortifacients.

image obtained from http://www.psychologytoday.com/

As I pointed out elsewhere, “By definition, a contraceptive is something that prevents conception, which is what the grouping of chemical contraceptives collectively known as ‘the pill’ do [much] of the time. However, they are not error-free – conception still happens for some. It is at this point that the preventative measures built into ‘the pill’ kick into a ‘damage-control’ mode of sorts, turning the contraceptive into an abortifacient, or a means by which the conceived child is expelled from the body.” Basically, what happens is that part of the inherent design of the most popular forms of birth control is for the uterus’s lining to become intentionally inhospitable to the conceived child. Or, more technically, “Combination oral contraceptives act by suppression of gonadotropins. Although the primary mechanism of this action is inhibition of ovulation, other alterations include changes in the cervical mucus, which increase the difficulty of sperm entry into the uterus, and changes in the endometrium, which reduce the likelihood of implantation” (The Physician’s Desk Reference, 1995, 1775; cited in Randy Alcorn’s well-researched booklet, “Does the Birth Control Pill Cause Abortions?” available in full Online by clicking on the title; original emphasis).

Do you see the problem? We have elevated our pursuit of our own ideal personal world to the point where we’re willing to pay human life for it.

President Obama’s administration has fought for government funding of abortifacients and Planned Parenthood (one of the largest abortion providers in the nation), deceptively terming such action as nothing more than government-sponsored “preventive care for women” (theblaze.com). Marcia D. Greenberger, Co-President of the National Women’s Law Center (NWLC):

“The final decision by HHS to guarantee women coverage of contraception with no co-pay is a major milestone in protecting women’s health. Contraception is critical preventive health care and its use among women of child-bearing age is nearly universal. The coverage of contraception without co-pays is especially important because studies show that even moderate co-payments can cause some low- and moderate-income women to forgo this care. We applaud this step forward for women’s health, and will work to ensure that all women, regardless of their employer, will receive this needed health care.” (from “HHS Decision On Contraception Coverage an Important Milesone,” NWLC)

(While I could rightly devote the rest of this post to admonishing life-valuing couples to abandon abortifacient birth control and spread the word about its destructive impact, I simply refer the concerned reader to Randy Alcorn’s booklet mentioned above: “Does the Birth Control Pill Cause Abortions?”)

image obtained from http://www.clevelandleader.com/

The President’s position – and those who stand with him, such as the NWLC – might work… if it were an issue of women’s health at all. But it’s not. Pregnancy is not a condition on par with pneumonia – something that needs to be cured. It is not a threat to women’s health, but a glorious expression of a woman’s God-given reproductive health, to be enjoyed within the marriage bond. And abortion is not the common surgical removal of unwanted “tissue with potential,” on par with getting a mole removed. Indeed, the scientific community has long since abandoned the justification of abortion via the argument that abortion is not the taking of innocent human life. Rarely does an informed person claim that anymore. (For more information, see “Normalizing the Inconceivable: A Scientific Problem of Being and Personhood.”) Rather, this is the perspective on the matter, represented by abortion militant Merle Hoffman:

“They knew [what an abortion does], but my patients who made the choice to have an abortion also knew they were making the right one, a decision so vital it was worth stopping that heart. Sometimes they felt a great sense of loss of possibility. In the majority of cases, they felt a great sense of relief and the power that comes from taking responsibility for one’s own life.” (Intimate Wars, quoted in Albert Mohler, “Abortion is as American as Apple Pie – The Culture of Death Finds a Voice”)

Instead, consider this view of pregnancy:

“So Boaz took Ruth, and she became his wife. And he went in to her, and the LORD gave her conception, and she bore a son.” (Ruth 4.13, ESV)

“Behold, children are a heritage from the LORD, the fruit of the womb a reward.” (Psalm 127.3, ESV)

Children are to be held in high esteem – the very glory of their parents, given by God as a gift!

But not in the United States of America, apparently. Not to President Barack Obama and those who stand in league with him in his militancy regarding a deceptive and false view of “women’s health care.” And make no mistake, our President’s is a position of militancy. To enact law that requires employer-provided health plans to provide abortifacient birth control and abortion service is one thing, if it’s governmental. To mandate it in the public sector is another. But to force religious institutions that are fundamentally and irreconcilably opposed to such methods of birth control as a matter of faith and conscience to either offer it or cease providing health care coverage is nothing short of unconstitutional and systematically oppressive. By mandating the death option that claims roughly 3,000 lives per day in the United States (“A Biblical Mandate to Do Something About Abortion”), we continue to institutionally climb the icy slopes that – I do not exaggerate – saw the rise of Nazi Germany.