President Obama and his democratically controlled congress are now in a frenzy to pass their national health care plan. An effort is currently under way to get the plan passed in the House of Representatives, then use a “budget reconciliation” procedure to pass it in the Senate. This procedure requires a simple majority of only 51 votes for passage. This reconciliation procedure is now being pursued, for since the election of Scott Brown, the Senate lacks sufficient votes to pass the bill with a 60-vote majority.
I strongly object to the nationalized health-care plan on several grounds, but my primary concern involves the practice of abortion. The Senate health bill, in its present form, provides for taxpayer funding of elective abortions through federal funding of Community Health Centers. The House bill originally provided 7 billion dollars for these centers, but Obama raised the amount to 11 billion. Because this funding is a part of the actual bill, it will not be subject to the Hyde Amendment that bans federal funding of abortions. The wording of this bill will have to be changed by Senate procedures in order for abortion funding to be prevented.
Many of us object to the practice of abortion because we believe it constitutes murder. We are, therefore, conscientiously opposed to funding the procedure. The Bible makes no distinction between a born baby and an unborn baby with respect to the sanctity of life. Genesis 25:22 says that Rebekah’s “children struggled within her.” The word for “children” is the Hebrew word “ben,” which is used hundreds of times in the Hebrew Scriptures to refer to born children. Of course, Rebekah’s “children” were in her womb. Furthermore, these unborn “children” both had a unique purpose in the events of human history – they represented two nations.
The New Testament is consistent with the Old in this classification of the born and the unborn: Luke used the same word (baby, Gr. brephos) to describe a baby whether it was in the womb (Luke 1:41) or out of the womb (Luke 2:12). The conclusion is unavoidable: God values the unborn as He does the born. Biblically speaking, it is just as wrong to kill an unborn baby as it is to kill a born baby. In Psalm 139:13-16, king David eloquently described his prenatal development in his mother’s womb, and he said that God was mindful of every phase of his development.
The above passages speak of people that God knew from the womb, and for whom He had large plans. Jeremiah is another Bible character whose existence, personality and character were acknowledged before his birth. Jeremiah 1:5 says, “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.” God here tells Jeremiah that He had plans for Jeremiah before his was even born, and the Bible contains numerous examples of this kind of thing. Hannah devoted Samuel to the Lord before his birth (1 Sam. 1). An angel announced special plans for Samson before his birth (Judges 13). No doubt, God recognizes the life of the unborn.
Exodus 21:22, 23 is a very helpful and instructive passage relating to this issue. Moses wrote, “If men who are fighting hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman’s husband demands and the court allows. But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life.” The contrast is between a “premature” delivery and a “miscarriage.” In the event of an injury resulting in a premature delivery, the offender would be appropropriately fined. In the case of an injury resulting in a miscarriage, the life of the killer was to be taken as a punishment for the life of the baby. The life of the unborn baby is considered to be equal in value to the life of the man who caused the loss of the unborn baby’s life. Under the law of Moses it was a capital offense to kill an unborn baby.
We must value the life of the unborn as does God. Let us oppose human legislation that would force us to fund that God considers abominable.
-Tim Haile