It should surprise no one that I am a Southern Baptist.
First and foremost, of course, I am a Christian. Then I am a Southern Baptist. There’s doctrine and then there’s the often-overused term dogma.
Being a Baptist doesn’t get you into Heaven or wash away your sins any more than any other denomination. That’s Christianity. Being a Baptist is just how I practice my Christianity.
I have a Berean philosophy, which means I won’t take anything at face value, but instead, I want to know more before making my own decision. I refuse to lockstep with even my best friend unless I’m satisfied the path we’re on is the right one. Baptist theology aligns with what I have studied and prayed about. It came from roots planted by parents, true, but it grew from my own experiences and study.
The Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) met last week, and immediately became the latest target in this year’s street-gang political races. The SBC voted, narrowly, to oppose in vitro fertilization as it is currently practiced, because fetuses that are not used are destroyed. The measure came in support of one state’s ongoing battle over abortion laws. That resolution immediately made the SBC the enemy of “women’s reproductive health” and led to the usual jokes about Baptist women being barefoot, pregnant and in the kitchen.
Notice my emphasis above: sixty percent of Southern Baptist messengers at the convention voted against IVF as it is currently practiced. The reason for this is because Baptists consider any viable fetus to be a human being, and destroying a fetus is killing a God-created human being, whether that fetus is destroyed through abortion or disposal as medical waste (as happens with leftover frozen fetuses).
Contrary to what some of the talking heads claim, SBC churches do not have to do exactly what the SBC says. If a church adopts the Faith and Message Statement, they are bound by an admission of faith, not by an oath to man.
The convention doesn’t force its members to do what the SBC says, unlike other denominations. Churches are independent, and expected to act prayerfully and biblically. No church is going to be forcibly disbanded, sued or drawn and quartered if they disagree with the SBC resolution on IVF. I sincerely doubt that many churches will even leave because of the resolution.
But the pro-abortion news media and politicians would have you think otherwise.
The media has been full of women crying that they never would have been able to have children had they not had IVF, and the Southern Baptists now want to prevent other families from having kids. Indeed, the media and the politicians on the left have been handwringing and fingerpointing since Roe Vs. Wade was overturned, claiming that millions of women are now in danger of dying because the Supreme Court ruled that abortion is a matter for states to decide. I actually heard one commentator the other day say the SBC resolution is “another nail in the coffin of reproductive rights.”
Some of those same pundits and electeds who have no problem normalizing child sexual abuse, using taxpayer dollars for sex changes for pre-adolescents, and legalizing abortion up to birth. Yet they call the SBC, traditional Catholics and fundamental Christians in general extremists for wanting to protect the lives of children.
I was actually a little surprised that the “gay couples having kids” flag wasn’t waved more by the critics of the SBC, but I think even the left is starting to realize that most folks don’t care that much about homosexuality, unless someone is intent on forcefeeding it to them. Forcefeeding anything doesn’t work well with an angry electorate in these strange and perilous times. The courts have ruled that gay and lesbian couples can adopt children, and whether I agree or not, that settles it. Folks are greatly disturbed by the left’s current obsession with homosexuality and abortion, but the politicians have apparently decided that abortion is an easier sell than gay entitlement.
I do not have any children, and never will. It saddens me sometimes, but God had other ideas. I understand the pain of realizing I’ll never have children to nurture and watch grow. I understand the desperation. Had it financially been an option, we might well have tried going the route of IVF.
One could argue that infertile couples “should” adopt an older child in need first, but again, it’s a personal choice, and it’s a bureaucratic nightmare. Meeting the ridiculously high, bureaucratically driven standards of adoption actually make it easier to adopt a child overseas and bring him or her home than it does to help a child here at home. I know folks who have successfully done so, and I know other folks who had their hearts ripped out when they spent thousands of dollars and hundreds of hours jumping through hoops, only to be told they weren’t good enough.
I knew one professional, upper income couple who were well established and respected, yet they were told that since they were nearly bankrupt – from paying lawyer and adoption fees – they weren’t suitable for adoptive parents, by the same agencies who bankrupted them.
But the bureaucracy of helping children who managed to be born is a column for another day.
When an IVF couple has a successful pregnancy, in most cases, the remaining fetuses – babies – are destroyed. Those perfect, miraculous, little human beings created by God by the combination of a sperm and an egg are deemed no longer useful.
The idea of disposing of “unwanted” children like last week’s takeout dinner horrifies me. How do you choose? Who chooses? What makes Test Tube No. 1 any more special than Test Tube No. 4? Why would No. 3 be less loved than No. 5?
I would submit that extra “unwanted” fetuses should be available for implant in other couples. There are thousands of couples out there who would jump at the chance to adopt a fetus. Make adoptions of fetuses an option for both the original IVF parents and adoptive parents.
If you can give up a baby for adoption by simply dropping the child at a fire station, police department or Social Services office, then by cracky you should be able to give a fetus to a couple who want a child of their own. Let the adoptive couple pay for implanting of the fetus, of course, but above all else, save the baby.
Regardless – no unborn child should be killed because they are inconvenient or no longer wanted, whether the child is conceived by accident in a womb or in a laboratory. God allowed that child to be conceived, in accordance with His will and His plan.
Every single child deserves the right to grow up.
No child should be flushed down a toilet or tossed in a biowaste incinerator as a sacrifice to convenience and politics.
