I thought it might be helpful to revisit the discussion about “absolute evil” and abortion to think through more carefully about how we think about things. As a refresher, the debate was as to whether the recent amendment to the Crime and Policing Bill removing reference to a other aborting her own child should be described as “absolute evil.”
There are two things to pick up on here. First of all, the use of terminology like this and whether it is hyperbolic in those contexts. Pretty much every negative reaction to my own comments centred on the argument that I was expressing concern about language that Jesus and the Bible use.
I think that this is because people focused on the word “evil” which of course is used frequently in Scripture to describe both human rebellion against God and that of Satan and the demons. However, I was specifically thinking of the extended term with modifier. This isn’t, as far as my searches can tell generally used in Scripture.
And with good reason. There are two reasons why someone might use the term “absolute evil”. On the one hand, it might be intended to indicate that we are dealing with an absolute truth here. In other words, regardless of cultural context, the thing should be considered evil, this is not morally subjective. On the other hand, it might be used because we feel that the word “evil” is not strong enough to describe how repulsive something is.
The thing is that we do not need the modifier in either circumstance as Christians. All wickedness is objectively, or absolute evil because it is rebellion against God. It is not a subjective matter. And whilst we may struggle to express our revulsion at something, I would suggest that there isn’t a stronger term to describe what should be worthy of our revulsion, what should be resisted with all our might and what we should flee from than the word “evil”.
Now, when it comes to the abortion debate, the issue seems to be this. We want, rightly to describe abortion itself as evil. However, the argument is that there are worse types of abortion than others. Now, we need to be careful here because we want to recognise that all sin is the same but at the same time, all is different. I think we would recognise that someone who takes particular cruel and sadistic pleasure in torturing and causing suffering to the one they kill is doing something even more horrific than the person who simply kills quickly. However, I’d be inclined to suggest that it is less that there is another level of evil as that evil has had a deeper and greater affect on the person.
And what then of the specific issue in hand. Is it more grievous to kill a foetus at 36 weeks in the womb than to kill one at 24 weeks. The later is more fully developed and has a greater chance of survival outside of the womb but the former can potentially survive. What then about 12 weeks or 1 week? It seems that we have a greater emotional stake in the baby nearer to term and we have relied heavily on the argument of viability when seeking to reduce the number of weeks at which abortion is legal. Yet from God’s eyes, is there a difference? No, God is clear that all murder is evil. Fascinatingly the same people who wanted to insist that there is more evil to killing the baby at 36 weeks have also relied on the argument that a day or a week after birth the killing of the child would be seen as evil and require punishment. So, when we go the other way, people do recognise that moral relativity doesn’t work.
Finally, we need to think about what it is that the particular legislation was doing. It has been described as legislation that is intended to increase the legality of abortion up until term. Certainly that is a potential side affect of the legislation and some people may happily promote that as a perceived benefit. Indeed, maybe there are those who have pushed the measure with the intention of using it as a means to extend abortion. However, I think it is reasonable to take the reasons for the amendment given at face value. This was not an amendment to ecxtend abortion. It was an amendment to remove mothers from criminal provisions when it concerns their own pregnancy.
Now, you may happen to argue that this is the wrong thing to do. You may believe that a mother should always be prosecuted where there is an illegal abortion. I personally think that there may well be a number of circumstances where prosecution of the mother is not the best thing to do. However, I also believe that this amendment is wrong. There are better and more truly compassionate ways of resolving genuine concerns for other. However, I’m not convinced that in this case, that intent is significantly more repulsive than abortion itself.
Faithroots 