Christianity & Abortion In America: Backwards In Time

BY ROSEANGEL FERNANDEZ

It took two ultrasounds to confirm the miscarriage. The mother, Nevaeh Crain, had sought emergency care in her home state, Texas. After the first ultrasound, doctors determined that the fetus no longer had a heartbeat. But hours later, after noting that Nevaeh had blood between her legs, that doctors decided they needed to take another ultrasound. As Nevaeh grew pale, fading in and out of consciousness, the medical professionals caring for her continued to hesitate; Texas’ severe abortion regulations could invite consequences from the law.  Instead of removing the fetus, doctors allowed Nevaeh to die.

Nevaeh Crain’s death exemplifies the way that severe abortion regulations increasingly endanger lives, preventing necessary medical care for women suffering from miscarriages. Furthermore, it indicates the way that conservative Christianity has shaped America’s modern legal system, pitting religious freedom against inclusive and fair laws—especially in the case of abortion. While religious freedom is vital, it now extends to controlling people’s personal choices, particularly regarding their bodies. But why has our legal system given up individual liberty to accommodate beliefs with which not all Americans identify?

The First Amendment is one of the most important parts of the U.S. Constitution because it protects freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, and more. It gives people the right to express their beliefs and challenge the government without fear of punishment. This freedom is a core part of what it means to live in a country that values individual rights. A good example of how important this protection has been is the Scopes “Monkey” Trial in 1925, where a high school teacher was put on trial for teaching evolution in a Tennessee public school, which went against a state law favoring a biblical creation story. The case started a national debate about science, religion, and education, showing how the First Amendment protects not just personal beliefs but also the right to learn and teach.

On January 22, 1973, the Supreme Court also passed a law extending the Fourteenth Amendment’s particular protection of “liberty.” Protecting women’s constitutional right to have an abortion, Roe v. Wade established that the Fourteenth Amendment’s protections for individual privacy guaranteed the right to an abortion before fetal viability. As a result, pregnant people, not the government, should decide whether or not to carry a pregnancy to term.

As the POLITICO article “The Religious Right And The Abortion Myth” explains, many evangelical leaders in the early 1970s were undecided or even supportive of abortion rights. Author Randall Balmer writes, “Two successive editors of Christianity Today took equivocal stands on abortion. Carl F. H. Henry, the magazine’s founder, affirmed that ‘a woman’s body is not the domain and property of others'” (Balmer). This shows that many Christians were not originally against abortion. In response to Roe, however, more people, particularly conservatives, started opposing it. Pro-life advocates began to cite the Bible as a reason why abortions are wrong and why they should be banned. According to this belief in the life of the unborn, abortions were wrong because they violated Exodus 20:13,”Thou shalt not kill.” Advocating for anti-abortion laws would protect the most vulnerable, fulfilling a divinely granted duty to protect “life.”

In the decades after Roe, then, these Christians tried to create a society honoring the moral order of their God, through public policy that aligned with Christian ethics. In a 2016 article in Decision Magazine, well-known evangelical leader Franklin Graham expressed his belief that Christian moral principles need to be represented in laws, stating, “There is no place for compromise on straightforward moral issues such as abortion and same-sex marriage. God has given us clear, biblical direction that we must follow and obey.”  

Even though the separation of church and state was theoretically established in the Constitution, many Christians came to oppose abortion on a moral and ethical level, believing that life, created by God, begins at conception. Eventually, on June 24, 2022, the Supreme Court stripped civil rights from women, by overturning Roe v. Wade. Making abortion the subject of state rather than federal law, this decision enabled states to ban the procedure, forcing women to travel to other states to gain abortion access. Some states have proposed bills to prevent citizens from going outside of their states in order to get abortions, target abortion funding, and even penalize people who help others travel for abortion care. For instance, anti-abortion activists in Missouri and Texas are pushing a bill to restrict people from traveling to other states for abortions (“Interstate Abortion Travel”).

Though these Christians view abortion as “killing” a life, the reality is more complicated than that. People who have medical issues during their pregnancies—miscarriages, birth defects, even life-threatening issues to the woman’s health—need abortions.  New state laws therefore increase the mortality rates of infants and young women like Nevaeh. Amanda Zurawski is another example. Because doctors delayed her care until there was no baby heartbeat, she almost died from sepsis. These stories show how these laws harm women who wish to become mothers as well as those who seek abortions. That is why it is so harmful when lawmakers pass laws without thinking about the lives of actual people, because they are influenced by religion.

Furthermore, those forced to carry a pregnancy to term are also more likely to face financial instability, unemployment, and poverty, according to research. A study published in JAMA Network Open found that patients who traveled out of state for an abortion paid an average of $294.50 in out-of-pocket travel, while in-state patients paid $33.50 for an abortion. Those with lower incomes, who don’t even have enough money to travel out of state, must now pay more out of pocket for medical care. As a result, clinics in states that support abortions are overworked, as they treat patients from out of state. This means that, in areas like Illinois and California where abortion is still allowed, clinics continue to see a rise in demand. Both in state and out-of-state patients now find it difficult to get immediate treatment because of longer waiting times. In turn, waiting times cause women to die in childbirth, leaving living children motherless and placing more kids into the foster care system. 

Today, when laws are created based on religious values, like the belief that life begins at conception, it blurs the line between church and state. That’s why the First Amendment matters so much in the abortion debate. It’s not just about religion; it’s about whether everyone gets to live by their own beliefs or be forced to follow someone else’s. It should be a priority to support laws that protect an equal and fair legal system for all citizens while respecting each person’s freedom. We should be moving forward and respecting one another. Instead, we’re moving backwards in time and removing the right for women to live freely and choose for themselves.

I don’t think Christianity and abortion rights have to always be in conflict. Abortion wasn’t always viewed through a conservative Christian lens; today’s debate is largely shaped by political agendas, not the beliefs of all Christians. Indeed, there are Christians who support the right to choose, and not everyone religious agrees with banning abortion, like some Jewish communities that see access to abortion as a religious requirement in certain cases. What I don’t support is the idea of making laws that take away people’s freedom. If people could just live by their values without trying to force them on everyone else, I think we could coexist more peacefully. Laws shouldn’t invade people’s privacy or take away their ability to make personal choices. Since the First Amendment also protects freedom from religion, no single belief system should be used to make laws that affect everyone in the country. I still don’t fully understand how the government was able to pass a law that goes against its constitution.

Works Cited

Balmer, Randall. “The Religious Right and the Abortion Myth.” Politico, 10 May 2022.  https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2022/05/10/abortion-history-right-white-evangelical-1970s-00031480 

“Interstate Abortion Travel. All You Should Know.” Pandia Health, 2024, https://www.pandiahealth.com/blog/interstate-abortion-travel/?srsltid=AfmBOoqcg0t085Z_UgHJUcnvp1No8aqs95qaeZ8odlCoazuX0kPhkWUm. 

“Texas Supreme Court Rules Against Women Denied Abortion Care Despite Dangerous Pregnancy Complications.” Reproductive Rights, 31 May 2024. https://reproductiverights.org/zurawski-v-texas-ruling-texas-supreme-court/ 

Thornton, OL, Fulcher, IR, et al. “A Post-Dobbs Analysis of In- Vs. Out-Of-State Abortion Travel Experience in Massachusetts and Illinois.” Contraception, Volume 139, 110580, November 2024. https://www.contraceptionjournal.org/article/S0010-7824(24)00275-0/abstract 

Weber, Kathryn. “Franklin Graham: There Is ‘No Compromise’ on Abortion, Gay Marriage.” Christian Post, 18 May 2012. https://www.christianpost.com/news/franklin-graham-there-is-no-compromise-on-abortion-gay-marriage.html