Abortion  and  the War of Worldviews

Click Here to Enter
the
RTM
STORE

Ten Questions and Answers about the Abortion
Debate with RTM Director, John Wynne

Q.1.  What is the position of Restoring Truth Ministries (RTM) on the
issue of abortion?

A.1.  RTM is dedicated to the defense of human life in all stages, from
conception to natural death.  RTM believes that there are no valid exceptions
that would justify a direct abortion, through which the life of an innocent
unborn child is deliberately terminated as an end or as a means to an end, for
such an act is murder.  The commonly heard arguments for exceptions by
pro-choice advocates are logically, ethically, and scientifically flawed.  
[See
the "Is Abortion Ever Moral?" PDF in the box to the right for an
explanation of the fallacies of commonly heard supposed justifications for
abortion.]

Our formal position incorporates the following arguments:

1) it is always wrong to intentionally take an innocent human life;
2) medical science and reason clearly establish that abortion takes an
innocent human life;
3) consequently, abortion is always wrong.  Further,
4) because of the devastating physical and psychological impacts of abortion
on women, arguments to keep abortion legal out of concern for women are
misleading and are usually tabled by abortion providers and others willing to
exploit women for profit, power, or convenience;
5) a society truly concerned for women would widely publicize the risks of
abortion and would stop the exploitation of women by ending abortion.  

Q.2.  If abortion is so devastating to women and kills an unborn child,
why has it been so difficult to achieve a majority who self-identify as
pro-life?

A.2. The number who self-identify as pro-life has steadily increased and
now constitutes a slight majority according to some surveys. This trend is a
testament to those in the pro-life movement who have gone before us and
who have labored tirelessly to protect the unborn. Still, two primary
obstacles remain and combine to thwart a further and potentially dramatic
increase in pro-life numbers. If the pro-life movement can address these
obstacles, the scourge of legalized abortion would soon end.

First, America has become a post-Christian nation in which a majority now
hold to moral relativistic worldviews.  These alternatives to Christianity
include humanism, postmodernism, the New Age, and liberal theology.  
Those who embrace moral relativism believe that it is inappropriate to make
moral judgements, and that no action is always wrong, including abortion.  
Many moral relativists also practice a life of hedonism (pleasure seeking) and
realize that they could become involved in an unwanted pregnancy, which
reinforces their pro-choice position.  Such underlying attitudes are
acknowledged by Christopher West who writes in
Theology of the Body for
Beginners
(p. 15)

    Make no mistake: in the final analysis the abortion debate is not about
    when life begins.  It is about the meaning of sex.  What most men
    and women who fight for abortion want is not so much the "right" to
    kill their offspring, but the "right" to have unrestricted sex without
    consequences.

Thus, the first obstacle consists of the non-Christian worldviews held by a
majority of Americans that foster belief in moral relativism and, often, result
in a life of hedonism, both of which lead to a pro-choice position.  The pro-
life movement has not adequately addressed the reality that behind the
abortion debate is the war of worldviews.  

The second major obstacle is that the vast majority of Americans simply do
not know that dozens of medical studies have established that post-abortive
women commonly suffer devastating physical and psychological
aftereffects.  Consequently, much of the population mistakenly believes that
"legal" abortions mean "safe" abortions, and that a society concerned for
women must keep abortions legal.  Because of this misinformation, even
though a significant percentage of Americans feel uncomfortable about
abortion because they realize it takes innocent life, they maintain that
abortions should remain legal.  In their scale of justice, the benefit of keeping
abortions "safe" for women outweighs the taking of innocent life.  

The combined impact of moral relativism and misinformation about abortion
risks largely explains why sound ethical arguments based on the natural law
are often ignored or have limited impacts, and why abortion remains legal.  
Reflecting the interplay of these two factors (moral relativism and a
misunderstanding of abortion risks), bioethicist David C. Reardon of the
Elliot Institute writes in
Making Abortion Rare, A Healing Strategy for a
Divided Nation
(pp. 20-21):

    ...the vast majority of Americans question the morality of abortion...
    Yet, at the same time, the middle majority believe it is unfair to judge
    others, especially when you do not known their personal history...the
    middle majority is paralyzed by competing feelings of compassion for
    both the unborn and for women.  They are honestly discomfited by
    the killing of unborn babies.  It nags at their conscience.  Yet this
    nagging is offset by their concerns for the welfare of women...[their]
    inability to reconcile these conflicting compassions has resulted in an
    uneasy acceptance of the status quo.

And so the killing continues.  

As long as the majority embraces moral relativistic worldviews and is
misinformed about the devastating health impacts of abortion on women, it
will be very difficult to widely overturn abortion laws, even though it may be
possible to maintain a slight majority who profess to being pro-life.

Q. 3.  Your position implies that winning the abortion battle will
require this in the pro-life movement to engage in the war of
worldviews and to increase public awareness about abortion risks.  Is
this accurate?

A. 3.  Yes. Traditional pro-life efforts should continue, but should be
complimented in two ways. First, we must develop strategies to expose the
fatal flaws common to all relativistic worldviews and to limit the
indoctrination into these worldviews. Second, we must find ways to more
widely present medical information about the devastating health effects of
abortion.

Q. 4.  Where should pro-life efforts be focused?

Q.4.  As a first step, we must ask ourselves why so many have departed
from Christianity, and why so many are misinformed about the aftereffects
of abortion. When this is done, it becomes clear that the largest source of
error in these two areas is the same: it is
the public education system in
America
. This reality tells us that if we hope to see an end to legalized
abortion, we must confront the classroom indoctrination into moral
relativistic worldviews, and we must introduce the truth about abortion
risks in the public school classroom.

Q. 5.  What evidence is there that the public school classrooms are
used to indoctrinate students into humanism or into other worldviews
holding to moral relativism?

A. 5. Repairing the Breach documents that, while many public school
teachers are Christian, humanistic educators have controlled the National
Education Association (NEA) and the direction of public education since
1900, and they have deceived innocent students and usurped parental rights
in order to indoctrinate the youth into this worldview.  Indoctrination has
become the overriding mission of public education, and this reality is clearly
seen in statements from leading educators, such as the following:

    Every child in America entering school at the age of five is insane
    because he comes to school with certain allegiances toward our
    Founding Fathers, toward his parents, toward our elected officials,
    toward a belief in a supernatural being, and toward the sovereignty of
    this nation as a separate entity.  It's up to you, teachers, to make all
    of these sick children well.             
                       
                                                                            - Chester Pierce

    I am convinced that the battle for humankind's future must be waged
    and won in the public school classroom by teachers who correctly
    perceive their role as the proselytizers of a new faith; a religion of
    humanity....teachers must embody the same selfless dedication as the
    most rabid fundamentalist preachers, for they will be ministers of
    another sort, utilizing a classroom instead of a pulpit to convey
    humanist values in whatever subject they teach, regardless of the
    educational level-preschool, day care or large university. The
    classroom must and will become an arena of conflict between the old
    and the new-the rotting corpse of Christianity, together with all its
    adjacent evils and misery, and the new faith of humanism,
    resplendent in its promise of a world in which the never-realized
    Christian ideal of "love they neighbor" will finally be achieved.

                                                                           - John Dunphy

    ...it is the business of the school environment to eliminate, so far as
    possible, the unworthy features of the existing environment from
    influence upon mental habitudes...Every society gets encumbered
    with what is trivial, with dead wood from the past...the school has
    the duty of omitting such things from the environment...As a society
    becomes more enlightened, it realizes that it is responsible not to
    transmit and conserve the whole of its existing achievements, but
    only such as make for a better future society.  The school is its chief
    agency for the accomplishment of this end.         

                                                                             - John Dewey

Q. 6.  How does the indoctrination into false woldviews occur?

A. 6. Every subject - history, psychology, science, sex education, and social
studies - is taught from the humanist's point of view, even though this often
involves false historical and factual claims.   

One of the most important strategies involves the presentation of Darwinism
as a fact of science, even though all of the so called "proofs" of evolution
are clearly disproved in the scientific literature (see
Repairing the Breach
and the Tear Sheet page on our web site). The Darwinian deception occurs
because evolution theory provides the claimed intellectual justification for
humanism, postmodernism, the New Age, and liberal Christianity. That is,
materialistic evolution not only provides a non-theistic answer to the
fundamental philosophical question: "Where did I come from?", but
Darwinism is logically linked to moral relativism.  Charles Darwin, for
example, attributed the sense of morality to natural selection and the
evolution of instincts, writing that "the moral sense lies in the social
instincts..and these instincts no doubt were primarily gained as in the case of
the lower animals."  The implication is that if man's social instincts and
sense of morality are the product of blind evolutionary forces rather than a
reflection of God's eternal law, there is no obligation to follow one's
conscience.

Moral philosophers and educators continue to apply this logic and view man
merely as an evolutionary by-product, having no inherent dignity or value
above that of other animals.  This view is especially applied to the unborn
and to infants. As expressed by James Rachels in
The Moral Implications of
Darwinism
(2002):

    Any adequate defense of human dignity would require some
    conception of human beings as radically different from other
    animals.  But that is precisely what evolutionary theory calls into
    question...This being so, a Darwinian may conclude that a successful
    defense of human dignity is most unlikely...an infant with severe
    brain damage, even if it survives for many years, may never learn to
    speak and its mental powers may never rise above a primitive level.  
    In fact, its psychological capacities may be markedly inferior to those
    of a typical rhesus monkey. In that case, moral individualism would
    see no reason to prefer its life over the monkey's.  

Related specifically to abortion, humanists would reason that evolutionary
science and modern philosophy have shown belief in God to be the product
of ancient superstitions.  Since God is a myth, any notions of moral
absolutes and of the natural law are merely an evolutionary byproduct that
need not be obeyed, for they have no ultimate basis.  This means that
nothing can be viewed as always wrong, including abortion.

One final connection between Darwinian science and abortion is
noteworthy. Many high school biology textbooks continue to teach
Haeckel's recapitulation theory.  This theory, known for decades to be
completely without merit, claims that as a human develops in the mother's
womb, it passes through a fish stage, an amphibian phase, a reptile phase,
etc.  This false claim remains in the textbooks because it steers students
toward the pro-choice position.  After all, how can it be immoral to end the
life of an unborn fish?  

Most pro-life efforts have not addressed the underlying worldview issue,
and they have all but ignored the evolutionary science that drives so many of
our youth to embrace false worldviews.
This is a strategic mistake that is
costing lives and souls each day.

The pro-life movement should be THE driving force behind the
introduction of truthful information from the scientific literature
challenging Darwinism, such that the indoctrination into false,
evolutionary science is exposed and stopped.
 Since evolution theory is
scientifically lacking, and because the relativistic worldviews of
humanism, the New Age, postmodernism, and liberal theology are
intellectually dependent upon evolution theory, simply presenting truthful
science in the classroom would point out the fallacies of moral relativistic
worldviews, while still maintaining the separation of church and state.  

Q. 7.  How do public schools mislead students about abortion?

A. 7. Many public schools steer students into the pro-choice position by
directly teaching moral relativism through various psychological techniques
that are part of the widely used Outcome Based Education.

Even more direct and devious, many schools aim to create an internal
conflict in students through various sex education techniques.  The conflict
occurs when students are exposed to sexual information and situations that
numb the natural sense of modesty and that encourage openness to any and
all sexual behaviors.  The hope is that students will eventually reject
traditional Christian teaching, or give in to temptation and walk away from
their faith.

A key supporting strategy is to mislead children about the harmful
consequences of promiscuous sexual behavior.  In fact, public school sex
education and birth control counseling routinely present the following five
lies to students:

1. that there are only minor abortion aftereffects;
2. that abortion does not kill an innocent human being;
3. that abortion and contraception are needed to avert overpopulation;
4. that sex outside of marriage is safe; and
5. that research has established a genetic cause of homosexuality

Confirmation of this strategy is found in books endorsed by the NEA, and
by reviewing the
NEA Handbook, which sets forth the ideology and agenda
of the nation's largest union. Resolutions in the
2006-2007 NEA Handbook
call for: 1) funding to eliminate sexual orientation and gender identification
and stereotypes (Resolution A-14); 2) programs that increase acceptance of
homosexuals, bisexuals, and transgendered persons (B-11); 3) increased
NEA activity in sex education with teachers being exempted from
censorship or legal action, and programs that provide students with
information about "birth control and family planning...diversity of sexual
orientation and gender identification." (B-47); 4) "family planning counseling
and access to birth control and instruction in their use" (C-23); and 5) family
planning clinics in the schools that provide "intensive counseling by trained
personnel." (I-13).

To support their pro-abortion, pro-promiscuity objectives, the NEA has
opened the public schools to GLSEN (a pro-gay organization now with
chapters in more than 3,000 schools), SIECUS (a pro-abortion, pro-gay sex
education organization that trains thousands of sex educators in public
schools), and Planned Parenthood, the nation's leading abortion provider.  
The impact of this approach cannot be overstated.  In
Grand Illusions we
read the following account of a 15-year old girl whose school allowed
Planned Parenthood into the sex education classroom:

    The woman from Planed Parenthood was so sleek and sophisticated...
    the whole class just fell under her spell...She started asking us
    personal questions. Very personal questions.  Like about our
    feelings.   About sex. And even about...well, about...masturbation!"...
    [She then] put a short film on the school's wheezing, rattling
    projector.  "I've never seen pornography before...[b]ut this film was
    worse than what I could have ever imagined hard-core pornography
    to be...I wanted to look away or cover my eyes, but I couldn't...I just
    stared at the screen - in horror."  When the lights came back on, the
    entire class was visibly shaken.  With eyes as saucers, the youngsters
    sat speechless and amazed..."She then began to tell us that everything
    that we'd just seen was totally normal and totally good..She said that
    the couple obviously had a caring, loving, and responsible relationship
    - because they took proper precautions..."  At that, the speaker
    passed several packages of condoms around the room-one for each
    of the girls.  She instructed the boys to hold up a finger so that the
    girls could practice contraceptive application.  Already shell-shocked,
    the students did as they were told.  Afterwards, several of the girls
    began quietly sobbing..."I have never been more humiliated in all my
    life...I felt dirty and defiled after seeing the film.  But then, when I
    had to put that thing on Billy's finger-well, that was just awful. It was
    horrible.  It was like I'd been raped.  Raped in my mind.  Raped by
    my school. Raped by Planned Parenthood. I think I was - that we all
    have been - betrayed."

With this background, it becomes clear why it has been such a struggle to
get an active pro-life majority.
Many pro-life arguments are linked to the
existence of moral absolutes, the natural law, and the rights of the pre-born.
Such arguments, while perfectly sound, have limited effect when
generations of students: 1) are trained to be moral relativists, 2) are
misinformed about the consequences of abortion and believe that "legal"
abortion means "safe" abortion, 3) are intentionally lured into a life of
hedonism, and 4) are influenced by those in the media and government who
were, themselves, previously indoctrinated by the educational system.
.
Q. 8. What is the RTM view of the classroom indoctrination?

A. 8. RTM believes that such indoctrination not only involves the usurpation
of parental rights to raise children according to parental beliefs; it is also a
form of child abuse that must be challenged and stopped.  

Why pro-life organizations, along with others who object to classroom
deception (and this should include
every Christian ministry and every
denomination) have not united to directly challenge the indoctrination in
schools is not only a mystery,
it is a very serious strategic error that is,
quite literally, costing lives each day and it is costing souls
.  As long as
we fail to challenge the classroom deception, the vast majority of our efforts
will be directed at damage control, the killing will continue, and the chances
of changing the culture may permanently fade.

Q. 9. Can the worldview indoctrination in our schools be stopped?

A. 9. The hour is now very late for this nation and for the ability to
successfully challenge the indoctrination in our schools.  Even so,
Repairing
the Breach
sets forth strategies that can possibly turn the tide at the local
and national level.  These strategies revolve around creating public
awareness of the indoctrination occurring, and then leveraging the resulting
public outcry (we believe that approximately 90 percent of an informed
public would strongly object to the indoctrination) to force a change in
classroom policy at local and national levels.

One specific example related to abortion would involve coordination among
state pro-life groups, other pro-family groups, educational reform groups,
and other conservatives to develop state legislation that would forbid the
teaching of false information in public schools that helps to form pro-
abortion attitudes.  At a minimum, the legislation could: 1) require the
introduction of information to refute the false claims appearing in many
science textbooks that, while in the womb, an unborn child retraces its pre-
human evolutionary history (Haeckel's recapitulation theory), with the
unspoken implication that it is acceptable to abort a non-human; 2) require
the introduction of information in health and sex education class to make it
clear that, from a medical and scientific standpoint, human life begins at
conception and abortion ends a human life; and 3) require the presentation of
information in health and sex education class explaining the serious health
effects to women having an abortion, with a summary of statistics from
relevant studies [see the adjacent "Is Abortion Ever Moral?" for more
information on these three issues].  

Such legislation would not involve a religious position and would not even
present an ethical position, it would simply involve the presentation of valid
science and valid medical information and statistics.  While such legislation
would be strongly opposed by pro-abortion groups such as Planned
Parenthood and the NEA - two organizations who understand the power of
classroom indoctrination and who will oppose a challenge to their monopoly
status - parents have the right to insist that truth is taught, especially when
the lies now taught place students in danger of being harmed physically,
emotionally, and spiritually. There is also a strong state interest to see truth
taught in this area, but where state efforts cannot be won, efforts at the
local school board level can be undertaken and any school board member
that cannot even take measures to protect the lives of children should not be
re-elected.

Q. 10. What resources would you recommend for someone wanting to
learn more about abortion and the war of worldviews?

A. 10. Two of the best resources refuting pro-abortion arguments are Randy
Alcorn’s book,
ProLife Answers to ProChoice Arguments and Stephen
Schwarz's book
The Moral Question of Abortion.  A book that is very
insightful from a strategic standpoint and that explains the impact of
misinformation about the health effects of abortion is
Making Abortion Rare:
A Healing Strategy for a Divided Nation
, by David C. Reardon.

To learn more about the historical development and worldviews behind
legalized abortion in the U.S., as well as strategies that target the root cause
of the classroom and national embrace of abortion, see our book,
Repairing
the Breach
.  Another recommended book concerning the extent of
classroom indoctrination is
From Crayons to Condoms, by Steve Baldwin
and Karen Holgate.

Three recommended pro-life web sites are:
A debilitating weakness in modern evangelicalism is that we've
been fighting cultural skirmishes on all sides without knowing what
the war itself is about.  We have not identified the worldviews that
lie at the root of cultural conflict-and this ignorance dooms our best
efforts. The culture war is not just about abortion, homosexual
rights, or the decline of public education.  These are only the
skirmishes.  The real war is a cosmic struggle between worldviews-
between the Christian worldview and the various secular and
spiritual worldviews arrayed against it.   –   Chuck Colson
Is Abortion Ever
Moral.pdf
 
 

    Is Abortion
   Ever Moral?

Evaluating the following 10
claims for the continued
legalization of abortion:

1.  Medical science tells us that the
unborn embryo is not human, it is
simply a mass of tissue in a
pre-human stage.  If it is not
human, it is not wrong to abort.

2.  Even if the unborn are human,
they are not of equal worth and are
not really human persons since
their bodies and brains are not very
developed and they cannot feel
pain.

3.  In a humane society, there must
be exceptions, such as in the case of
rape or incest.

4.  Abortion must be allowed if the
mother's life is in danger, and for
other health risks.

5. If abortion were illegal, U.S.
citizens by the tens of thousands
would be forced into back alley
abortions and thousands of women
would die.

6. I'm personally for fewer
abortions, but I don't think that I
should impose my morality on
others.

7.  The Supreme Court has found it
Constitutional to allow abortion
and we must accept the law of the
land.

8. Abortion should be allowed
because we face an overpopulation
problem.

9. Your arguments against abortion
rest on the moral judgment that it is
always wrong to take an innocent
human life.  But we are now in a
'postmodern' era that rejects all
notions of truth and moral
absolutes, so who are you to tell
me what is right or wrong and to
force your religious beliefs on me?

10. People can have honest
differences of opinion on
controversial issues such as
abortion.  A reasonable
compromise is to allow each person
to decide the morality of abortion
for their own self.  Such freedom
should especially extend to a
woman because abortion involves a
woman's own body.

To learn why each of these
pro-abortion claims fail from a
scientific, medical, and logical
perspective, click on the following
document, which can be printed,
copied, and distributed (but not
sold) free of charge. This
document also appears on the
RTM "Truth Tear Sheet" page.
 
Is Abortion
Ever Moral.pdf
For more information on the
RTM website and material use
policy, see
"Use Policy" on
the Contact Us page.
Thank you for your
prayerful and financial
support of Restoring
Truth Ministries, LLC