Women facing crisis pregnancies should also be able to talk with their religious leaders. These leaders should provide comforting and Godly words. They should only advise women into choosing life, both for the good of the unborn child and the mother. Such pro-choice talking points from the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice and The Religious Institute terribly distorts the role of a religious leader.

Blogging for Live Action News, I’ve written extensively as to why you can’t really be pro-choice and Christian. As one by the username “Marauder,” commented on another past article of mine for Live Action News:

I do think that Christians should be pro-life, because if you’re a pro-choice Christian, what you’re basically saying is, “I think Jesus would be okay with tiny humans being dismembered in the womb,” and I think Jesus made it pretty dang clear that He was NOT someone who would approve of any human beings being dismembered anywhere. The guy knew about suffering and death. I can’t imagine Him going through death by crucifixion and then saying, “Yeah, having gone through a horrible bloody death myself, this is something I recommend people should force other people to do.”

Indeed. One cannot proclaim that Jesus Christ is his Lord and Savior and then advocate for the brutal killing of the least of us.

I am speaking as a Christian, but it is worth pointing out another comment for an article I wrote a few months ago, titled “Does God hear prayers for abortion?” This comment, from “johno” mentions those who are secular and pro-life, as well as those who claim to believe in God but are pro-choice.

What about people who are secular pro-life and atheist? I’d be real interested in their opinion about those who are “god” fearing but believe in abortion.

Such a comment is rather thought provoking. What would groups like The Christian Left, the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice, and Catholics for Choice, say? Their answers would certainly not be what Jesus Christ himself would say. The Bible may not reference abortion, but that does not mean Scripture condones it. The Bible is pro-life.

Unfortunately, those who believe that pro-lifers are imposing science on others also exist in the religious movement, as Secular Pro-Life mentioned with their piece from July, “Don’t Impose Your Science on Me!” The post breaks down a piece from Rabbi Aaron Alexander for The Huffington Post.  One of the most notable things Rabbi Alexander pointed out, with original emphasis:

So this is the part I don’t understand. Your definition of when life begins is not based on scientific fact. It is your religiously held belief. But it isn’t mine.

Rabbi Alexander continues to make it about imposing religious beliefs on others, even to say that “[y]ou are saying, to be blunt, that your religion is correct and mine is incorrect — coercively.”

So, as Rabbi Alexander mentions, he is “…going to speak as a person of faith to my fellow brothers and sisters of faith.” Secular Pro-Life raises a point, about those who are pro-life but are not “fellow brothers and sisters of faith,” and what their reasons may be for being pro-life. Perhaps becauselife actually does begin at conception?!

The rabbi speaks about supporting women in his piece:

My religious tradition — which prioritizes life above all else — generally assumes that potential life doesn’t become its own living entity until 40 days into the pregnancy. And, for the entire pregnancy, the mother’s life is always given priority. Right up until birth. (See Mishnah Ohalot, 7:6.) That includes both physical health, and even in certain cases (like rape), emotional health as well.

To say that “…for the entire pregnancy, the mother’s life is always given priority. Right up until birth[,]” does not sound like “[a] religious tradition[,] which prioritizes life above all else[,]” at least not all life.

Groups like the ones mentioned above talk about being pro-women, and being concerned about their health, even “emotional health as well.” Never mind that abortion has so many negative emotional and physical effects on women, including risks for complications in the future. I would like to know what such religious leaders have to say about unborn children in the womb, especially the ones which “become its own living entity… 40 days into the pregnancy[,]” or the ones who can feel pain. Religious leaders have a duty to protect their flock, and this includes the most innocent, vulnerable and defenseless amongst us, the unborn.

Women facing crisis pregnancies should also be able to talk with their religious leaders. These leaders should provide comforting and Godly words. They should only advise women into choosing life, both for the good of the unborn child and the mother. Such pro-choice talking points from theReligious Coalition for Reproductive Choice and The Religious Institute terribly distorts the role of a religious leader.

Now, despite the oxymoron of those who are pro-choice and claim to be religious, there may be a bit of a misconception about religion and morality. Such is that since these people are guided by God, they must be good and moral. Some may wonder how atheists can be good when they are not guided in the same manner. Secular Pro-Life has addressed this as well. And, pro-choice people of faith completely knock this notion to pieces when they claim to follow God, and some even His Son, Jesus Christ, while being in support of something as horrific as the legalized and brutal killing of unborn children.

I am a Catholic and I am proud to be pro-life. I am not pro-life because I am a Catholic, though I am thankful to hold the same viewpoint as my Church, which has been a leader in the fight for the unborn. And I am thankful for the diversity in the pro-life movement. I am also thankful that there are those who may not share my faith, but who are with us on this issue. The 1 in 6 million campaign shows that. It’s not just awesome that there are 6 million pro-lifers, but that the other side is wrong when they assume we’re religious nut jobs.

Sarah Terzo also writes for Live Action News. An article that particularly comes to mind is her piece, “On being a pro-life atheist.”  This article mentions another piece from the site, regarding Shawn Carney’s view that the greatest strength of the pro-life movement has to do with religion.  Both articles made good points, came from well thought out perspectives, and had worthwhile commentary surrounding them.

As a person of faith, I would like to apologize that pro-choice religious persons give their beliefs a bad name. They don’t follow the same Jesus, or God, that I do. For those who do call themselves pro-choice and Christian, I ask that they re-examine their position and their faith. Perhaps it is time that they choose one or the other, for one cannot truly be both.

This article first appeared on the Institute on Religion and Democracy’s blog and is used with permission.