We Do Not Regulate Murder: The Biblical Call to End Abortion Entirely

⚖️No Partiality with Murder: A Call to True Abolition

1. Introduction: A Gospel Issue, Not a Political Platform

Abortion is not merely a political debate. It is not a matter of “personal choice” or “healthcare policy.” It is the sanctioned shedding of innocent blood — and according to Scripture, “The Lord hates… hands that shed innocent blood” (Proverbs 6:16–17).

The call to abolish abortion is not a side issue in the Christian faith; it is a Gospel issue. For if Christ came to destroy the works of the devil (1 John 3:8), and the devil is a murderer from the beginning (John 8:44), then it follows that the people of Christ must stand against murder in every form, with no compromise.

Yet in our own time, the movement that claims to be “pro-life” has too often opposed the very laws that would end abortion altogether. Incrementalism, political expediency, and fear of public backlash have replaced the prophetic witness of the Church with half-measures and hollow victories.

---

2. Lessons from History: The Church and True Abolition

When William Wilberforce fought to end the slave trade in Britain, he did not push for “smaller slave ships” or “gentler slave conditions.” He demanded abolition — the complete outlawing of the practice — because slavery itself was an affront to God’s image.

Likewise, when the Reformers confronted the idolatries of Rome, they did not negotiate for “fewer indulgences.” They called for the wholesale rejection of false worship and a return to the authority of Christ and His Word.

So too with abortion: anything less than full abolition is a concession to evil. As the Westminster Larger Catechism reminds us (Q.135–136), the sixth commandment not only forbids unjust taking of life, but requires all lawful endeavors to preserve it. Incrementalism, by its very nature, allows murder to continue — and in so doing, fails to love our neighbor as ourselves.

---

3. Naming the Compromise: When “Pro-Life” Opposes Life

In recent years, we have seen multiple examples of prominent pro-life organizations and political leaders actively opposing bills that would have ended abortion in their states.

In 2022, Louisiana’s Abortion Abolition Act (HB813) — a bill that would have recognized the personhood of the preborn and criminalized abortion as murder — was killed in committee after major pro-life lobbying groups claimed it was “too extreme.”

In Texas, similar abolition bills have been stalled or opposed by “pro-life” politicians who feared the political fallout of applying equal protection under the law to both mother and father.

In multiple states, pro-life organizations have celebrated heartbeat bills and 15-week bans while opposing personhood amendments — laws that, by definition, still permit thousands of abortions to occur.

This is not victory. This is the regulation of murder, not its abolition. And as long as we accept partiality with innocent blood, we fail to honor the God who is no respecter of persons (Acts 10:34).

---

4. The Root Problem: Fear of Man Over Fear of God

The incremental approach is not simply a difference in strategy; it is a difference in foundation. Incrementalism assumes that God’s standard is too high for the culture, and that we must negotiate our way toward justice rather than declare it outright. It whispers, “We can’t say all abortion is murder — not yet — they’re not ready to hear it.”

But Christ never commissioned His Church to accommodate the darkness. He commanded us to proclaim, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand” (Matthew 4:17). The Great Commission is not delayed obedience — it is a declaration of Christ’s lordship to all nations, here and now.

When the Church trades boldness for political safety, it is salt that has lost its savor. And if the salt loses its saltiness, it is good for nothing but to be thrown out and trampled underfoot (Matthew 5:13).

---

4b. Answering the Objections: “Extreme Circumstances” and the Accusation of Cruelty

One of the most common charges leveled against abolitionists is that we are “extreme” because we will not allow exceptions — even in cases of rape, incest, or threats to the mother’s life. The implication is that we are reckless with women’s lives, that we desire suffering, or that we are indifferent to complex situations.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

First, regarding life-threatening pregnancies:

The biblical command, “You shall not murder” (Exodus 20:13), is never a command to passively allow death when it can be prevented. In rare medical situations — such as an ectopic pregnancy — where both mother and child will die without intervention, treatment is not considered “abortion” in the biblical or abolitionist sense. The intent in such cases is never to kill the child, but to save the life that can be saved.

Second, regarding rape and incest:

The circumstances of conception, however horrific, do not determine the humanity of the child. Scripture never grants us the right to punish an innocent party for the crimes of another. To kill a child because of their father’s sin compounds the evil — it does not cure it. In God’s law, the death penalty is for the guilty, not the innocent (Deuteronomy 24:16).

Third, regarding the accusation that we “want women to die”:

This is an emotional slander that collapses under honest examination. Abolitionists long for women to live — both physically and spiritually. We desire a society in which mothers are supported, not abandoned; in which fathers are held accountable, not excused; in which medical care is advanced to protect both patients, not pit one life against the other. The reality is that in the vast majority of cases, both lives can be saved — and in the rare exceptions, our moral duty is to save life wherever possible without committing murder in the process.

The abolitionist position is not cold-hearted legalism. It is a consistent application of the truth that all human life is sacred. And that conviction refuses to shift — even under the pressure of “hard cases” — because it is anchored in the unchanging character of God.

---

5. Postmillennial Hope: Christ’s Kingdom Will End This Evil

The fight for abolition is not a doomed cause. Christ reigns now at the right hand of the Father (Psalm 110:1–2), and He must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet (1 Corinthians 15:25). That includes the enemy of legalized murder.

Satan is bound (Matthew 12:29; Revelation 20:2–3), the Gospel is going forth to the nations, and the leaven of Christ’s kingdom is working through the whole loaf of human history (Matthew 13:33). We labor not as those who hope to barely survive, but as those who expect the earth to be full of the knowledge of the Lord as the waters cover the sea (Isaiah 11:9).

Abolition is not merely possible — it is inevitable. The only question is whether we will be found faithful in our generation to declare God’s standard without compromise.

---

6. A Call to the Church: No More Partiality

Church of the living God — we cannot outsource obedience to politicians or advocacy groups. We cannot baptize compromise with the language of “strategy.” We must preach the whole counsel of God, disciple our people to think biblically about law and justice, and call our governing authorities to kiss the Son, lest He be angry (Psalm 2:12).

The blood of millions cries out from the ground. And the Judge of all the earth will do right (Genesis 18:25).

Let us, then, stand as our forefathers did — refusing to call evil good or good evil — and declare without apology: All abortion is murder. All image-bearers have worth. And all nations are commanded to obey Christ, now.

✒️The Pilgrim’s Post