Abolitionists Are Going to Get People Killed, and the SBC Just Helped Them

Abortion abolitionist man talking to another man
By Steenaire, Flickr
Estimated reading time: 24 minutes

It would be an understatement to call this year’s Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) meeting turbulent. It was marked by the departure of a key leader, moral failures of many leaders who remained, a contentious presidential election, another leader threatening to leave if he didn’t get his way (always the hallmark of a good relationship), and the decision to finally address sexual abuse by clergy.

None of the believable mistakes surprised me, even if they disappointed me. But the unbelievable mistake, an unbiblical error which will likely cost the lives of unborn children, was that this divided convention passed a resolution condemning pro-life incrementalism and supporting nothing but immediate, exceptionless abolition of abortion.

In the first section, I will print the SBC’s resolution in its entirety, though without scriptural proof texts and with added emphasis. I will then proceed to show that the SBC is aiding and abetting a group of misguided radicals whose foolish actions will result in more death, not less.

A Mental Health Counselor on Psychology in Debate (with Robin Atkins)

Download MP3 | 1:01:26

Robin Atkins is back to discuss psychology in debate. Robin is a licensed mental health counselor, specializing in reproductive issues. She also has a philosophy degree. She spent four years doing home-based therapy with the Department of Children’s Services. She’s a pro-life advocate with an atypical perspective on some of the issues surrounding abortion.

Fine-Tuning the Responsibility Objection: A Reply to David Boonin

Caution Asbestos sign on rusting container
Estimated reading time: 15 minutes

Boonin’s Bodily Rights Argument

In his recent book, Beyond Roe: Why Abortion Should be Legal—Even if the Fetus is a Person, philosopher David Boonin develops a pro-choice argument that appeals to the legal case McFall v. Shimp. Here is Boonin’s description of this case:

Robert McFall was an asbestos worker from Pittsburgh. In 1978, he was diagnosed with aplastic anemia. The doctors told him he’d die if he didn’t get a bone marrow transplant. And they said he needed one soon. Preliminary tests for tissue compatibility were quickly conducted. Only one promising candidate was found: a cousin of McFall’s named David Shimp. Before additional tests could confirm his compatibility, though, Shimp had a change of heart. He refused to submit to further testing. And he declared that he wouldn’t give McFall any of his bone marrow even if it was needed to save McFall’s life. Running out of options at that point, McFall decided to sue Shimp. In the motion filed by his attorney, McFall asked the court to order Shimp to undergo the additional testing and, if the results were positive, to order Shimp to give him the bone marrow he needed.[1]

The judge ruled against McFall, deciding that the state had no right to force Shimp to let McFall use his bone marrow. 

A Different Perspective: Adoption vs. Foster Care vs. Abortion

Robin Atkins is a licensed mental health counselor, specializing in reproductive issues. She also has a philosophy degree. She spent four years doing home-based therapy with the Department of Children’s Services. She’s a pro-life advocate and has very interesting thoughts on the topic of abortion.

This is the first of three episodes with Robin. In this episode, Robin discusses the differences between newborn adoption, foster care, and abortion.

Parthood, Personhood, and Bodily Rights

In a series of papers—”Lady Parts,” “Were You a Part of Your Mother,” and “Nine Months”—Elselijn Kingma develops and defends the parthood view of pregnancy: that human fetuses are literally a part of the gestating woman’s body.

If your mouth is slack and your eyes are squinting, yes, that was my first reaction, too.

If you have moved on from straight-up confusion to worrying about the implications for the abortion debate, that was my second reaction.

But let me invite you to move through reactions one and two and into reaction three: this claim is super interesting, plausible, and makes the case against abortion stronger.

Baby feet in persons hands

Estimated reading time: 10 minutes