Debunking the So-Called 'Christian' Talking Points of 'Evangelicals For Harris,' Part Four
The following is the third of a four-part series to be released on consecutive Sundays. This series is exclusive to members of The Western Journal.
Part one, which you can read here, stated that “Evangelicals For Harris’s” pro-Harris arguments contain three major flaws. Part two detailed the first of those flaws and part three the second. Here is the final installment of this series.
3. No, there is no equivalency between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris on protecting the life of the unborn.
Evangelicals for Harris, you will not be surprised to know, does not talk much about Kamala Harris’ record on abortion. For this, I will rely on Mr. French, since — in his piece — he did mention the part Evangelicals for Harris tries to keep quiet out loud, if not as effectively as I believe he hoped:
Even if you want to focus on abortion as the single issue that decides your vote, the picture for abortion opponents is grim. Trump should get credit for nominating justices who helped overturn Roe (though the real credit for the decision goes to the justices themselves, including the George W. Bush appointee Samuel Alito, who actually wrote the majority opinion)…
Barack Obama was an unabashedly pro-choice politician, yet there were 338,270 fewer abortions in 2016 than there were in 2008, George W. Bush’s last year in office. Though Trump nominated anti-abortion justices and enacted a number of anti-abortion policies, there were 56,080 more abortions the last year of his term than there were in the last year of Obama’s presidency.
Even worse, after Dobbs the pro-life position is in a state of political collapse. It hasn’t won a single red-state referendum, and it might even lose again in Florida, a state that’s increasingly red yet also looks to have a possible pro-choice supermajority. According to a recent poll, 69 percent of Floridians support the pro-choice abortion referendum, a margin well above the 60 percent threshold required for passage.
Advertisement - story continues belowIf the ultimate goal of the pro-life movement is to reduce the number of abortions, not just to change legal precedent, then these numbers and these electoral outcomes are deeply alarming. If present trends continue, then abortion opponents will have won an important legal battle, but they’ll ultimately lose the more important cultural and political cause.
Yes, liberal evangelicals are saying — this issue is lost for now, we’ve overturned Roe and it still hasn’t worked, deal with it.
It also doesn’t help that Trump’s position on the campaign trail regarding abortion bans has been protean, precisely because the pro-life movement hasn’t won a single referendum.
So, in other words, we are to stop trying and just give in to murder. Not only that, we’re supposed to hand the keys to the Oval Office to a woman who is part of an administration that tried to nuke the filibuster to make protection of abortion up until the moment of birth — a step much further than Roe ever allowed, mind you — a matter of federal law.
And Harris, as you might imagine, hasn’t been as reticent as Evangelicals for Harris regarding what she likes to call “reproductive freedom”:
He said we should “punish” women who have an abortion.
He said he is “proud” of his role in ending Roe.
He unleashed extreme abortion bans across the country.Donald Trump’s record and position on reproductive freedom are clear.
— Kamala Harris (@KamalaHarris) September 1, 2024
First, he got Roe overturned.
Then, he got abortion banned in 20 states.
Now he’s voting for an abortion ban in the state where he lives.If elected, he’ll sign a nationwide abortion ban if it crosses his desk. https://t.co/QxesVS9exG
— Kamala Harris (@KamalaHarris) August 31, 2024
Donald Trump made his position clear when he hand-picked three Supreme Court justices to overturn Roe—which has decimated reproductive freedom and jeopardized IVF access for American women.
I have never wavered on this, so believe me when I say: I will always protect…
— Kamala Harris (@KamalaHarris) August 30, 2024
If Donald Trump wins, he will not only sign an abortion ban—he also intends to create a national anti-abortion coordinator, forcing states to report on women’s miscarriages and abortions.
— Kamala Harris (@KamalaHarris) August 29, 2024
Donald Trump’s Project 2025 plan would give him unchecked, unprecedented power to implement his extreme agenda—including monitoring pregnancies and prosecuting women if they have an abortion.
The stakes this November could not be higher.
— Kamala Harris (@KamalaHarris) August 29, 2024
Never mind that these posts are riddled with falsehoods. Five times in four days did Kamala Harris’ official campaign account make it clear that access to murder of the unborn is the drumbeat they expect to propel them into the White House.
Does Mr. French believe that the statistical anomaly of fewer abortions under Obama than Trump will continue if Harris gets elected?
Let’s ignore that this really isn’t a statistical anomaly but a combination of the proliferation of the abortion pill and blue states practically encouraging abortion tourism, luring women from red states to kill their unborn children there in response to Dobbs.
Donald Trump may waffle a bit more than we like on sanctity-of-life laws at the state level in the name of electability.
Kamala Harris not only doesn’t believe unborn life has sanctity, she is staking her campaign on it.
Where, pray tell, do these evangelicals think abortion numbers will be under Harris? Lower? The same?
This is a naked statement of policy preference: Abortion is never safe, but Kamala Harris wants it to be very legal — up until the moment of birth, in fact — and never rare.
To adduce an equivalency is to ignore not only what these two individuals are saying, but have done while in power.
Again: I do not wish to ascribe bad-faith principles to Evangelicals for Harris or David French, at least as Christians. But their arguments do not add up, biblically, and Christians should not be swayed by appeals to character and emotion in opposition to concrete policy outcomes which enable Christian liberty, morality, and the right to life.
Truth and Accuracy
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.
Advertise with The Western Journal and reach millions of highly engaged readers, while supporting our work. Advertise Today.
