Reasons to Vote "No" on Pro-Abortion Amendments

In Florida and other states, citizens are being given the opportunity to exercise a more direct form of our authority by voting on constitutional amendments. Amendment 4, in Florida, is asking us to directly require that the murder of unborn children be considered a legal right. Thus, we, as Christians, must vote "no" and should try to persuade those in our circles to do the same. 

Three Reasons to Vote "No" on Pro-abortion Amendments

Reason 1: It grants a legal right to kill one's own child as long as it happens before he or she makes it out of the womb. 

1. From the moment of conception, there is a new human person, made in the image of God. The only difference between that person and you is that he or she is smaller and in the womb. The words "embryo" and "fetus" should not be used to dehumanize this small, vulnerable person. Those are simply levels of development. You are an adult; you were once a teenager, a child, a toddler, an infant, a fetus, and an embryo. 

2. We all know that the baby in the womb is a human person. That is why we celebrate when a friend tells us she is pregnant. It is unreasonable to believe that if she did not want to be pregnant that this same entity in the womb has now magically changed into something and is no longer someone. Such a change is not based on science or reason. It is double-speak aimed at redefining reality. 

3. Thus, abortion is the intentional taking of another person's life without justification (i.e., murder).

Reason 2: We are directly approving or disapproving of the murder of unborn children. God will hold us accountable.

1. If we approve such an amendment, we have set ourselves against God. 

Psalm 94:20-21 
Can wicked rulers be allied with you,
    those who frame injustice by statute?
They band together against the life of the righteous
    and condemn the innocent to death.

2. We have an obligation to use our God-given position to protect those being oppressed by violence

Proverbs 24:10-12
 If you faint in the day of adversity,
    your strength is small.
Rescue those who are being taken away to death;
    hold back those who are stumbling to the slaughter.
If you say, “Behold, we did not know this,”
    does not he who weighs the heart perceive it?
Does not he who keeps watch over your soul know it,
    and will he not repay man according to his work?

Reason 3: Florida's Amendment 4 is intentionally ambiguous in order to not sound as radical as it is (this is likely true of proposed amendments in other states too).

1. See below from

2. This amendment will invalidate virtually all pro-life laws that we currently have and it will be impossible to have any restrictions on abortion. 

Reason 4: It is a lie to claim we need this amendment to keep women from dying from medical emergencies during pregnancy.

1. If a woman has an ectopic pregnancy, the baby will die no matter what. If untreated, she will die too. The procedure to save her life is not an abortion, and it is legal. An abortion is one in which the medical procedure is aimed at the destruction of the unborn person; it is considered a successful procedure when the baby is dead. In cases like an ectopic pregnancy, the surgery is successful and aimed at saving the life of the women. A sad outcome is that the baby will not survive. Surgeries for ectopic pregnancies are legal in every state in the US.

2. In the case of a miscarriage, the baby has already died. The procedure to remove his or her body from the womb is not an abortion, and it is legal in every state in the US.

3. To argue that many women will die from getting back-alley abortions is false and morally foolish. It is false because many will not resort to back-alley abortions. It is morally foolish because, as we have established, the baby is a human person. So, this argument is saying, "We must not outlaw murder lest someone trying to commit murder might die in the process of breaking our law against murder." 

A Thought Experiment

To close this out, let's do a thought experiment. Let's say you could travel back in time to when you were in your mother's womb. And let's say that she is in a difficult circumstance and is considering an abortion. Would you want her to have the right to dispose of you to ease her own burden? If not, then why would you want to pass an amendment requiring that there should be no restriction on abortions for others?