The Streets
Press Releases

Our Purpose
Our Director
Support Us
Contact Us

email OSA
Web problems or suggestions?
Whose Moral High Ground are We Standing On?

Whose Moral High Ground are We Standing On?
by Jo Scott

Does the abortion industry have a moral high ground to stand on? Some Christians would say NO, but they have not taken the time to consider what is happening beyond their frame of reference. If we look beyond pro-life Christian circles, people think differently. Stem cell research in conjunction with abortion for rape and incest have become the moral high ground of the abortion crowd. Pro-life Christians must take the time to understand how the world and most uninvolved Christians think through the abortion issue.

How often do we hear, "The poor woman, she was raped, how can she raise a child knowing that the man who fathered her child raped her and forced her into an “unwanted” pregnancy. Or better yet, “With fetal stem cell research, scientists will discover how to cure disease and save countless lives. The babies will be killed anyway, why not do something that will benefit mankind with their remains?”

The world's false sense of compassion, coupled with a lack of knowledge, leads people to believe that abortion in the case of rape and incest are compassionate, moral choices. Thus giving the abortion crowd its moral high ground and further infusing our culture with the already accepted notion that a child is only a child when convenient.

Those of us that are in the battle against the atrocity of abortion understand that Jesus is the only emotional answer to rape. Only He can take the worst of circumstances and use them to His glory. He will comfort the unprepared mother and instill in her a boundless love for her child. She will understand, through Jesus, that her child is precious regardless of paternity. She will learn of the endless grace and mercy of Christ and come to know His peace that surpasses all understanding.

The abortion crowd says the woman that is raped will be comforted when she can put the whole incident behind her by literally throwing the baby out with the bath water. The public believes that she will return to a normal life; when in reality she's left empty, childless and without peace. She has not only been robbed of her child, but of the chance to actually heal emotionally with Jesus.

This week the South Dakota House of Representatives introduced a new bill that will ban abortion except in the case of rape and incest. The pro-life movement has been wandering in this wasteland for 35 years. The battle went on hold the day we were bribed, with a possible political victory, to consider rape and incest as exceptions. That day the argument went from “It's a baby,” to “What exception can we tolerate for the sake of political expediency?” On that day we stepped off the battlefield into the wasteland of compromise. God's command “You shall do no murder” has become a meaningless cliché as we stand side by side with the pro aborts on their moral high ground.

I'm assuming that incrementalism is the strategy behind the South Dakota bill. Incrementalism is the policy of making changes, especially social changes, by degrees. Incrementalism used without compromise can be a wise and useful pro-life strategy, but when mixed with compromised bills that end with and then you can kill the baby, it undermines the entire pro-life effort.

Unless and until we are prepared to tear down the high places of the abortion industry, abortion will not be defeated. Each time a bill like this is introduced the pro aborts are validated. It says to the world, and they believe, that some children are a threat to their parent's wellbeing and must be put to death. Each time we make the rape and incest exceptions a part our strategy to fight abortion, we diminish the sacredness of all human life and we shine a light on our own hypocrisy.