“...You shall not procure [an] abortion, nor destroy a
newborn child,” (Didache 2:1–2 [A.D. 70]).
Minucius Felix, a Roman convert to
Christianity had this to say about abortion in 226 AD:
“There are some [pagan] women who, by drinking medical
preparations, extinguish the source of the future man in their very bowels and
thus commit a parricide before they bring forth. And these things assuredly
come down from the teaching of your [false] gods. . . To us [Christians] it is not lawful either to
see or hear of homicide,” (Octavius 30 [A.D. 226]).
The Apostolic
Constitutions (the earliest surviving ecclesiastical law) stated:
“Thou shall not slay thy child by causing abortion, nor
kill that which is begotten. . . . [I]f it be slain, [it] shall be avenged, as
being unjustly destroyed,” (Apostolic Constitutions 7:3 [A.D.
400]).
DISHONORING GOD'S NAME
Abortion, the murder of an unborn baby, is not permissible
for a Christian to commit, facilitate, or support. It is
fundamentally unjust and Christendom has condemned it from the beginning. In an
article titled “Ancient
Child Sacrifice and Abortion,” Andrew White, MD, gives a historical
overview to abortion. I recommend reading the article. After describing the
parallels between abortion today and child sacrifice in ancient cultures, he
turns to the modern Christian:
“… And the Christian who approves of or participates in
the sin of abortion not only affects himself but he profanes God’s holy name.
People intuitively know that a man’s attitude and behavior reflect his values.
The Christian claims that God’s authoritative Word determines his values. If a
Christian then speaks or acts in a way that is contrary to that Word, he brings
dishonor to God’s name…And the Christian who approves of or participates in the
practice of abortion is testifying to the world that his God condones the
practice. He is in reality bearing false witness, for by his attitude and
behavior he infers that the Creator consents to His creatures destroying
innocent fellow creatures.”
Any formal or official approval of abortion on the part of
Christians (either individually or corporately) is a sin against God. And for Christians, who should love Truth above all, this is the foundational issue. Pastors
compound their sin when they urge their flock to approve A3
in November. Part One of
this series exposes the subtle pro-abortion slant to Amendment 3 (on the ballot this November) and the many loopholes
that will allow abortion to continue to flourish in Missouri.
 |
| Christian groups and others who support abortion via Amendment 3 From: MRL PAC |
Secular organizations like Missouri Right to Life are helping to fund a campaign urging pastors to
get out the vote for A3. MRL is not Christian in their stance on abortion, and pastors should not be taking their arguments as gospel, nor
agreeing with the faulty reasoning that permits ongoing murder of babies. Neither these groups, nor Christian pastors, have temporal or spiritual authority to set aside God's law and determine which babies shall live, which shall die, and under what circumstances."THE INCOMPLETE GOOD," AKA "THE LESSER OF TWO EVILS"
Saying Amendment 3 is an “incomplete good,” “the best we can do,” or
“it’s the only choice on the ballot” or voting yes means saving as many babies as is "providentially possible," are not logical or reasonable excuses for
voting for abortion. The lesser of two evils does not constitute a Biblical good.
Instead, Christian pastors and politicians should be advocating for the
abolishment of abortion through the personhood and equal protection bills
that have been filed in the Missouri Legislature.
Bowing down to the pro-life priestly caste at MRL, the
clergy have become modern-day devotees of a cult that elevates the sacrifice of pre-born children to a right. In a recent Zoom call organized by the
Missouri Baptist Convention, pastors
exhorted each other to engage their flocks on behalf of Amendment 3. They spoke about their 'Biblical' support for A3, but did not appear
to defend it using God's Word to logically lay out their case in defense of an amendment that also enshrines abortion in the state constitution.
In logic there is something called the law of non-contradiction. It states that something cannot both be true and untrue at the same time and in the same sense. Abortion cannot be both good and evil at the same time. If abortion is an evil, then it can never be a good. Voting yes on Amendment 3 is voting FOR abortion, regardless of the regulation of its provision.
There was very little discussion of the actual amendment and
its provisions on the Zoom call. One pastor said he "believed" A3 would save more lives
if it was passed than not. He offered nothing to support that belief. The meeting revolved around a church media campaign, again, partly
funded by MRL and supported by the Missouri GOP to get out the A3 vote and sign
up new voters.
Some pastors are receiving money from these organizations. Tom
Estes, a pastor at Calvary Baptist Church in Versailles, MO and current chief of staff for Sen. Rick Brattin,
has received $35,000 in the latest MEC
reports for “strategic planning” services at Her Health, Her Future.
Pastor Alex Bryant, a Nixa School Board Member, and pastor at Thrive Church in
Nixa, has received $10,000
from HHHF for “grassroots management,” also from HHHF.
A Sept. 28, 2026 article in the Missouri Independent noted, "The first TV ad released by Her Health, Her Future, did not mention abortion at all, but rather focused on “trans extremists.” The main campaign signage reads: “Yes on 3: Ban Transgender Surgeries for Minors.”
If you visit HHHF, you will see very little about abortion beyond Claudia Kehoe's featured statement, but much about the transgender agenda and women's sports, etc. However, their support for Amendment 3 means they believe abortion rights are permissible if regulated.
BREAKING THE MAGIC WORD SPELLS
The language surrounding this amendment has been carefully
curated to lead citizens to believe it is repealing abortion. The language in the amendment has words like provision, which means 'the act of providing or supplying something.' Though it claims abortion is restricted to only (only!) the following: children
conceived in rape or incest, fetal anomalies, and doctor-determined medical
emergencies, A3 includes significant loopholes in several provisions that are
noted HERE.
In short, abortion in Missouri is not being repealed. Missouri Right to Life and Christian pastors who have deviated from God’s
commandment, are asking voters to approve abortion, and to regulate its
provision. Dr. Wes Scoggins, a professor at Missouri State University and the
president of Abolish Abortion
Missouri, noted some of the leading lies about A3 that are consistently
told by its advocates.
“The three main arguments in support of it are all lies.
Number one is that it will prevent 98-99 percent of all abortions…and the truth
of it is that it won’t. That’s a lie. It won’t prevent because it does nothing
to criminalize the act itself…to hold anybody accountable for killing the
child. So we shut down the clinics…which is what A3 will do, and we simply
shift the abortion industry to online “tele-health” abortions.”
Dr. Scroggins said research on the issue shows that closing
clinics does not prevent abortion. Chemical mail-order abortions are booming,
he said, “…especially in states where you’ve got a lot of abortion
regulation and restriction. You know “tele-health” [abortions have] just
skyrocketed. It really doesn’t protect any child whose mother wants to kill
it…she can simply drive a couple of minutes across the state line on both sides
of the state and kill [her child] there.”
He noted another argument—that once the amendment is passed
the legislature could go back and fix any bad parts to it. “You hear that a
lot. The problem is, they can’t go back and fix anything. The exceptions are in
the constitution. The legislature cannot change the constitution. It would take
a vote of the people to do anything about those exceptions. And also, subsection 3 of the amendment reads
something along the lines that the legislature…may regulate the provision
of abortion. That’s the key word, ‘provision’. It doesn’t really give them the
authority to regulate abortion. It’s the provision of it. So my argument is
they are not going to be able to restrict it in any way. The only thing that
the amendment itself is allowing them to do is to regulate how these babies are
killed. So you read further down in that section—really what that means—and it
says such things as regulating clinics and making sure that doctors are
licensed and all of that stuff that they can regulate to make sure it is safe
for the woman. But none of that protects the baby, or does anything for the
baby. And so they can’t go back and really do anything to fix the problems with
A3.”
Dr. Scroggins also noted that supporters of A3 say the
amendment is the “best that we have.” He said, “Just because it’s the only option, or the ‘best’ option does
not determine whether something is good or evil, right or wrong. God has
determined that. He has told us what is good and what is evil, so just because
this is the only choice that we have on the ballot doesn’t means it’s
righteous.”
By genuflecting to MRL, legislators are denying and delaying personhood and equal protection bills--legislation that would actually protect unborn babies. Rep. Darin Chappell, for instance, will refile a personhood bill in the upcoming legislative session. However, he is supporting Amendment 3 which, if passed, would likely undercut support for any future equal protection or personhood legislation.
TOLERATING THE INTOLERABLE
 |
| From: X |
One of the most common arguments that Christian pastors give for approving Amendment 3 is that some children will be saved if abortion is regulated. In short, they are willing to sacrifice babies in the hope that regulated abortions will lessen overall rates of murder of the pre-born. Advocating for any legalized abortion dehumanizes certain classes of unborn children,
a distinction not in Scripture or Christian tradition.The media is happy to collude with pro-life lobbyist groups and call November’s A3 an
“abortion ban.” A3 does not ban
abortion. It regulates abortion, which stays legal in Missouri under the new
amendment.
This cannot be overemphasized.
And, chemical abortions, which are the majority of abortions,
are not addressed in A3. It also must be noted that when Missouri did have an abortion ban in place, women simply traveled to neighboring states
to procure medical abortions. And mailbox abortions rose sharply. Why are Christian pastors not speaking out about the loophole provisions in Amendment 3? You can read an analysis of 2025 abortion data (HERE) that gives a very different perspective than what proponents of A3 are selling.
THE IDOLATRY OF PLAYING GOD
"See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ." (Col. 2:8)
When pastors and leaders like Tom Estes, former representative Doug Richey, former speaker of the house Tim Jones, Rep.
Darin Chapell, Pastor Chris
Williams, Pastor Phil Hopper, Rep. Bill Irwin,
Executive Director of the
Missouri Baptist Convention Dr. Wes Fowler, Victor Nieves, Rep. Brian Seitz, Sen. Adam Schnelting, Sen. Brad Hudson, Rep. John Martin, and Catholics like Springfield’s Bishop
Edward M. Rice advocate for allowing regulated abortion they are opposing the
law of God and substituting the doctrines of men.
Voting to regulate abortion versus abolishing
it, is a doctrine of men and not of God. If personhood bills and equal protection
bills, which are introduced into the legislature every session, were as fervently
supported and preached on, then the battle to make abortion illegal would be
won in Missouri. But citizens are assured now is not the time for such bills, or that
“polling” shows they would not pass, etc.
MRL is focused more on the women who procure abortions than the
babies who are murdered by them. While their website pays generous lip service
to pro-life positions, these groups oppose providing equal protection and justice for unborn babies. They protect those who procure and facilitate the killing of infants in the womb, and they bank on Christian leaders agreeing. Here is Her Health, Her Future's stance on Amendment 3. Though there is very little about abortion on their website, nevertheless their ballot measure support is for allowing abortion.
 |
| The quiet part: "...to allow abortion..." |
In an article in the Washington Examiner, abortion abolitionist Ben Zeisloft shows the moral weakness in the establishment pro-life movement. “But the claim that women are categorically second victims of abortion extends beyond mere rhetoric. This assumption guides pro-life policy and even leads many pro-life groups to oppose bills establishing equal protection for pre-born babies by criminalizing abortion as murder.
More than 70 leading pro-life establishment groups signed
an open
letter in 2022 discouraging state lawmakers from ever supporting
such legislation. The document claims that “women are victims of abortion” and
warns that pro-life groups “do not support any measure seeking to criminalize
or punish women” for the willful murder of their own pre-born babies.
When writing their own legislation,
pro-life groups include carveouts exempting women from any civil or criminal
liability for abortion, meaning that no woman can be held accountable for
prenatal homicide — no matter how brazenly or publicly she kills her pre-born
baby — even in conservative states where pro-life establishment groups have
institutional political power.
In other words, abortions continue in conservative states,
especially by means of abortion pills, because pro-life groups oppose deterring
pregnant women from murdering their babies. While abortion clinics may have
been closed in such states, abortions are continuing — and are more convenient
than ever — under pro-life regulations with enormous maternal immunity
loopholes.”
MRL’s executive director Susan Klein signed that letter in 2022. Her husband is a Christian
pastor.
That letter reads in part, “Women are victims of abortion and
require our compassion and support as well as ready access to counseling and
social services in the days, weeks, months, and years following an abortion. As
national and state pro-life organizations, representing tens of millions of
pro-life men, women, and children across the country, let us be clear: We state
unequivocally that we do not support any measure seeking to criminalize or
punish women and we stand firmly opposed to include such penalties in
legislation.”
Note that women who murder their children are “victims”
who “require our compassion and support” not to mention “ready access
to counseling and social services…[for] years following an abortion.” In
essence, by signing that letter, Klein is saying that while abortion obviously
produces dead babies and traumatized women, it is not permissible to criminalize the deed. Since dead babies are not available for compassion, support, access to
counseling and social services, some other victim must be named. MRL’s
position is in no way a Christian stance, but a mixture of secular worldly
reasoning and the politicization of ethical standards.
In Missouri, it is not leftist organizations who are the
biggest problem. Dr. Scroggins said, “Organizations are our biggest
opposition...the biggest opposition to equal protection are the
pro-life groups that kill [personhood and equal protection] legislation every
single session...They are the ones in the capitol
killing it.”
As long as Christian leaders unite with secular interests to justify supporting the murder of innocents and the lack of justice that entails, abortion will continue with few impediments.
INSTITUTIONAL OPPOSITION TO EQUAL PROTECTION LAWS
Susan Klein, the executive director of MRL spoke to the
Missouri Senate, urging them not to pass SB356 EP, an
equal protection bill. Video HERE.
This is done under the guise of protecting women. What it protects them from is "equal and impartial justice under the law." Advocates of Amendment 3 are setting women apart as an elevated class of
individuals who are allowed to murder their babies and then receive support for it. In blind obedience to this perspective,
Christian clergy are bowing down to institutions whose agenda is to allow abortion and protect all involved except the babies themselves.
At its foundation, elevating women to a special class is a form of idolatry, “Gross,
or overt, idolatry consists of explicit acts of reverence addressed to a
person or an object...” Women are not beings who are set above God’s
law. The murder of a human being is a crime, and abortion is murder.
If Klein was truly concerned about women being coerced into
committing murder via abortion, she would vehemently support equal protection
and personhood bills. That she does not, and that she explicitly lobbies for
protecting women who murder their unborn children, shows the ultimate focus of
MRL.
In an important article at The
Federalist, written in the wake of the Lindsay Clancy case, Dusty Deevers
gets to the bottom of the issue: the second victim narrative. He writes, “Big
Pro-Life cannot wash its hands of this spectacle. For decades, it has preached
the same moral grammar now displayed outside that courtroom: When a mother
murders her child, center her suffering, relocate agency onto doctors, drugs,
systems, or circumstances, and treat accountability as another act of cruelty
against her.”
Further on, he says, “The problem runs deeper than
political strategy. Big Pro-Life’s governing commitments are fundamentally
secular and feminist, not biblical or according to nature.
Scripture and nature present women as image-bearers
endowed with moral agency, mothers bound to protect their children, and persons
answerable under the same law as men. Big Pro-Life instead begins with feminist
anthropology: The woman is the presumptive victim, guilt is translated into
trauma, sin into circumstance, repentance into healing, and accountability into
oppression.
It borrows the Christian language of compassion while
abandoning the biblical categories that give compassion moral order: sin,
guilt, repentance, mercy, justice, punishment, and impartial judgment.”
Deevers then moves to abortion via the mailbox by describing
exactly what we are seeing in Missouri, and what Dr. Scroggins noted. Deevers
writes, “In a clinic abortion, Big Pro-Life can rhetorically displace the
mother’s culpability onto the doctor, clinic, or procedure. But when a woman
knowingly procures the drugs, possesses them, and administers them for the
purpose of murdering her child, there is no external abortionist onto whom Big
Pro-Life can transfer her guilt.
She is literally the abortionist. The victim, intent, and
result have not changed...
…By treating abortion as a product to regulate rather than
a homicide to judge, Big Pro-Life is condemned to play whack-a-mole with
methods. Close the abortion mills and abortion moves to mailboxes. Restrict one
drug and another method takes its place. The instruments change because the
underlying injustice remains unjudged and the murderer remains protected.”
Amendment 3 does exactly what Deevers presented: the
regulation of the circumstances under which abortion is administered. The organizational priestly class of pro-life advocates are denying pre-born humans "equal and impartial justice under the law."
LOSING ONE'S RELIGION IN PRO-LIFE RHETORIC
All of this seems to pass over the heads of many Missouri
pastors and Christian legislators. They are stuck in an occultic egregore (group think)
that blindly parrots the unproved assertion some babies may be saved, therefore it is permissible to
abort other babies.
