Abortion and the Emerging Church
A discussion between Tony Jones and Sean McDowell

An installment of the April/May, 2007 column “Sparks: Iron Sharpens Iron” in
The Journal of Student Ministries)
www.thejournalofstudentministries.com

Sean says:

Although this may surprise you, Tony, I do not believe we should spend all our time and resources fighting abortion. Abortion is not the only issue. But I do believe that few Christians, and in particular, pastors and youth pastors, have taken this issue seriously enough.

The Psalmist put it this way: “Defend the cause of the weak and fatherless; maintain the rights of the poor and oppressed. Rescue the weak and needy; deliver them from the hand of the wicked” (Psalm 82:3-4). It’s difficult to imagine a segment of society more vulnerable than the unborn.

Biologically the unborn is a distinct, living, and whole human being. The embryo contains the complex genetic blueprint for every detail of human development. From the moment of conception the embryo is a member of our species, Homo sapiens.

Philosophically there is no relevant difference between an embryo and an adult. While the unborn may be smaller, less developed, dependent on the mother, and in a different environment, none of these are sufficient to deny it status as a full human being.

The Bible does not specifically mention abortion. However, it does say that because humans bear the image of God, the shedding of innocent blood is strictly forbidden. Thus, the question that trumps all others: Are the unborn human? The answer is clear. Science shows the unborn are indeed members of the human family. Given those facts, why would anyone think Christians are spending too much time on abortion?

Behind abortion lies a philosophy that is destroying our kids—seeing human beings as commodities. We must help our teens to see that their value comes not from their appearance but intrinsically from being bearers of the image of God.

As I speak to Christian teenagers throughout the country, I am amazed at how few are thoughtful about abortion. We must do a better job of training our youth to defend the unborn.

Tony says:

Sean, it may surprise you that I am against abortion. I find it an abhorrent practice and a blight on society. But I probably differ with you on a couple of sub-points.

Firstly, there are clear biological and philosophical differences between embryos and adult human beings. For one, most adult human beings can communicate. Embryos cannot. This may be all the more reason to protect the unborn, but we just can’t go around saying that embryos and adults are one-and-the-same. Commonsense tells us that’s not so.

And I talk to lots of teenagers, too, and I can’t remember one who sees “human beings as commodities.” Women don’t have abortions because they consider the life growing within them the equivalent of a hamburger or an iPod. They have abortions, most often, because they see no other way out of a disastrous predicament.

Since 1979, abortions among whites has steadily decreased while those among blacks and Hispanics has increased. Although affluent, white suburban teens do occasionally get abortions, most abortions are taking place among those ethnic minorities who tend to live in poverty. Too often, women get abortions because they’re desperately poor. Poverty is the cancer on our society, and abortion is a symptom of that cancer.

So, while I’m against abortion, I’m most interested in combating the overwhelming poverty among certain demographic groups that leads women to feel as though they have no choice but abortion. Similarly, the fact that we have the largest per capita prison population in the world is another symptom of poverty. Why do people commit crimes? Most often, because they’re poor. Many of the ills in our world will be mitigated if we can get a handle on poverty.

Sean says:

So we have some agreement (our readers might be surprised about that!). But here is my question: If there are clear differences between embryos and adults, why be opposed to abortion at all? If embryos are not human beings, why do you consider it abhorrent and why are you troubled by it?

Furthermore, why is communicating a value-giving property? Are adults in comas who cannot communicate somehow less human? None of these differences are germane to the nature, and hence value, of the unborn. The differences are merely functional rather than essential. Adults and unborn babies are one-and-the-same in what matters—being valuable human beings.

I share your concern for helping girls out of poverty so they won’t need abortions. But why should we place all our attention on this while unborn babies are dying? It’s too simplistic. Women have abortions for a host of reasons, many of which have nothing to do with finances. Imagine saying that instead of banning spousal abuse, we should work to understand the underlying social causes that lead men to beat their wives.

There is a third option: compassionate and gracious advocacy for the poor and the unborn. It works, Tony. I could give many personal examples.

Tony says:

Clear differences exist between me and my dog, and yet I don’t want someone to kill him. Yes, you say, but there are “essential” differences between us, therefore my life is more valuable than his.

This is ethically troubling territory, Sean, because one could argue that there are “essential” differences between me and someone with Down Syndrome. I have a perfect set of 46 chromosomes, but a person with Down has a duplicate of chromosome 21. It’s that extra chromosome that’s led some bioethicists to argue that persons with Down and other genetic abnormalities are less than human.

While distasteful to us as Christians, this is how the debate over human nature takes place in science, and relying on 2,000 year old Platonic categories like “essence” and “function” will not be compelling to anyone who’s not already a believer.

Further, it’s not our DNA that makes us human: we share 96% of our DNA with chimps (that’s ten times more than mice and rats have in common).

So we’ve got a theological dilemma: our faith tradition tells us that the “image of God” within us separates us from the rest of creation, but genetic research tells us that the difference between us and other species is slight.

I suggest that we find ways to protect all of life rather than arguing with scientists about what constitutes human-ness.

Sean says:

The difference between you and a dog is a matter of kind, whereas the difference between you and a Downs syndrome girl is a matter of degree. You both share the same human nature, though her ability to exercise that nature has been limited.

To say that science determines the parameters for the value of human life is to make a philosophical claim. Typical arguments for abortion claim that since embryos lack self-awareness, cannot feel pain, etc, they are somehow less human. These are philosophical claims about who is and is not a member of the human family.

Moreover, the idea that humans and other created beings have specific natures is a biblical idea, not merely a platonic one. Genesis 1 says God created each living thing after its kind.

It’s not the percentage of genes that count, but the quality that matters most. If animals are so similar to humans, should we spend equal time feeding zebras as we do homeless humans?

Tony says:

Actually, many ethicists today are arguing that the stratifications between humans and animals have actually led to the class system so prevalent in human societies. They go on to say that if we would start treating zebras better, we’d inevitably treat human better, too.

We’ve opened a real can of worms here, Sean, and I hope that lots of youth workers think deeply about these questions: What really makes us human? What really differentiates us from other species? If we want to engage the public debate on these issues, we need some sophisticated answers.

Ultimately, it’s the “image of God” that differentiates humans from other species, at least to Christians. And I think that’s connected to our rationality, the one component of our existence that no other species shares (as far as we know). But, like you, I believe that imago Dei resides even in the embryo and even in the person with Down Syndrome.

Coming up with ways to convince our broader society of those differences, however, will be a bigger challenge. Bible references alone won’t persuade.


Sean McDowell has written on the topic of abortion in his book Ethix: Being Bold in a Whatever World (B & H Publishers, 2006). ETHIX equips young people to think biblically about contemporary ethical issues such as abortion, homosexuality, war, marriage, and more.