Skip to main content

Did overturning Roe v. Wade impose religious beliefs on the masses? A refutation.

Overturning Roe v. Wade forces religion on everyone? A Pastor responds 

SEE "What does the Bible say about abortion?" By Clicking HERE.

Abortioneers argue that the overturning of Roe v. Wade imposes religious tyranny on the masses forcing women to have babies in the name of religion. Is this true?


Legal- The actual guilty party on the issue of “forcing beliefs on everyone” are the progressive Justices who instituted Roe v. Wade. The overturning of Roe v. Wade dismantled a judicial ruling that invented the right for an entire class of human beings, namely unborn babies, to be freely killed without any repercussions. Roe v. Wade was a government sanctioned murderous assault on the unborn that led to the killing of 67 million human beings without any legal consequences. The pro-lifers like myself who fought against Roe v. Wade were fighting for the abolition of one of the longest standing discriminatory judicial rulings in American history. Therefore, in reality the overturning of Roe v. Wade was an act of war on the tyranny of Roe v. Wade against humans in the womb, not an act of imposing tyranny upon women's rights.

Furthermore, because Roe has been overturned the issue is now going to be decided at the state level and voters now possess more of a voice on how the issue of abortion is handled in their state. Up to this point Liberals used “the loophole of the Supreme Court” to legislate it’s abortioneer ideology from the bench rather than in accordance with the will of the voters as a whole. If Liberals truly believe their polls that most of the country supports abortion then they should have no fear of the future, they should be displaying great confidence that the voters will address this matter and institute “abortion rights” at the legislative level. But they know their polls are fake and that’s why they are panicking, the voters will not be voting for unborn babies to be killed en masse any time soon. 

Moral- All legislation that seeks to criminalize certain behavior is inherently dealing within the realm of morality. Framing abortion as a purely religious question is illogical because it would be similar to framing all crime as a purely religious question- for example we have criminalized things like murder, theft, robbery, and assault without anyone claiming that the criminalization of these things “impose religion on the masses.” Therefore if abortioneers want to say that criminalizing the killing of the unborn is an inherently religious matter then they need to be consistent across the board with their claim and argue that all criminalized behavior is done out of a religious motive. Everyone knows this is not the case.

There are plenty of people who simply believe abortion is wrong without appealing to the Bible or to religious morality. In addition to this, claiming that women have a right to do what they want with their body as a way of saying “killing unborn human beings is not immoral” is itself immoral, as well as totally misleading. Nobody will object to the right to do as you wish with your body, and that’s why liberals use this rhetoric to cloak the real issue in emotional argumentation, but to equate bodily autonomy to the right to assault the bodily autonomy of an unborn child is absolutely unacceptable in every possible way. Arguing that bodily autonomy is only protected when you are outside of a womb is the very thing that led to the death of 67 million human beings inside the wombs of their mothers. This is not a trivial matter. The morality of protecting all human life transcends every religious construct and ideological argument that can be made. 

Societal- The culture of abortion has harmed the current and future well being of our country in a way that is nearly incalculable. It is a well known fact that if your country does not have a robust fertility rate, your country will cease to exist. Many countries are looking at the decrease in birth rates and the forecasts that project a “population bottleneck” and they are in great distress. This will create problems for the funding of social programs for the elderly, heavier taxation for those who are young and able bodied, worldwide economic destabilization including multiple recessions and depressions in various places, as well as deep vulnerabilities to the national security of countries with a declining population.

The culture of abortion has also created a sentiment of apathy toward the intrinsic dignity and worth of human beings as a whole. Our modern world is full of people who treat one another with bitter contempt, outright disdain, hatred and violence. The callousness of human beings toward one another cannot possibly be improved in the context of a culture that kills their unborn babies without so much as batting an eye. Unless we work to restore the dignity of human beings of every kind, especially humans in the womb who are the most vulnerable of them all, we cannot expect the callousness and violence in our modern society to improve in any way whatsoever. 

Important note- This article is not intended to bring shame and condemnation to women who have had an abortion and regret the matter. Jesus Christ offers forgiveness to everyone who puts their faith in His sacrifice on the Cross. If you've had an abortion before and you want to be forgiven and reconciled to God you can read THIS ARTICLE. God loves you, I pray His love is revealed afresh to you as you draw near to Him by faith!

Written by: Pastor Kyle Bailey, D.Min.


Popular posts from this blog

The Storm on Your Phone: learning to fix our eyes on Jesus in the age of social media.

Matthew‬ ‭14:25‭-‬31‬ ‭NIV‬- “[25] Shortly before dawn Jesus went out to them, walking on the lake. [26] When the disciples saw him walking on the lake, they were terrified. “It’s a ghost,” they said, and cried out in fear. [27] But Jesus immediately said to them: “Take courage! It is I. Don’t be afraid.” [28] “Lord, if it’s you,” Peter replied, “tell me to come to you on the water.” [29] “Come,” he said. Then Peter got down out of the boat, walked on the water and came toward Jesus. [30] But when he saw the wind, he was afraid and, beginning to sink, cried out, “Lord, save me!” [31] Immediately Jesus reached out his hand and caught him. “You of little faith,” he said, “why did you doubt?” During one of the most climactic moments of Jesus' ministry, the Apostle Peter demonstrated a dazzling expression of faith and power. Moments after stepping on to the water, his courageous efforts fizzled in defeat. He found himself in a dangerous duel with the depths of the sea. What was it tha

Israel, Gaza, and the Church- How should we respond?

Daniel 12:1- "At that time shall arise Michael, the great prince who has charge of your people. And there shall be a time of trouble, such as never has been since there was a nation till that time. But at that time your people shall be delivered, everyone whose name shall be found written in the book." The only Nation in the Bible that has an Archangel from Heaven appointed for its protection is the Nation of Israel. This reality reminds us of the extent to which God has gone in order to ensure that His covenant promises to the Jewish people are fulfilled, and also that the conflicts we are seeing in the earthly realm originate in the spiritual realm. God’s unwavering commitment to preserve the Jewish people is not based upon their “deeds of righteousness” but rather upon His covenant promises given to their forefathers Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Therefore, we must understand that there is a war in the spiritual realm against the covenant promises of God that is manifesting in

A Review of: "Calvinism, Arminianism & The Word of God: A Calvary Chapel Perspective" By: Chuck Smith

Recently a Pastor friend of mine shared with me an article written by the founder of the Calvary Chapel Denomination Chuck Smith. It was written with the intention of addressing the Calvinism vs. Arminianism issue for all of the Calvary Chapel Churches. To see the article CLICK HERE . First of all I like the format of the paper in which he clearly set out to address both views and then clarify the Calvary Chapel stance. A couple of things that I noticed I want to point out below: Overall he did a fair job conveying the Arminian view, however I am not sure why he seemed to be confused on a couple of things he said. Over the year Arminius’ beliefs have been misrepresented and demonized by Calvinists so I can see why he made a few false assumptions regarding their beliefs. 1. He stated, “Arminius believed that the fall of man was not total, maintaining that there was enough good left in man for him to will to accept Jesus Christ unto salvation.” This is actually a descript