Search this blog

Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of the Susan B. Anthony List, writes in The Washington Post:

Republicans too often treat the abortion issue like an eccentric aunt at Thanksgiving dinner — if they ignore it, maybe it will go away. And lately, Republican heads have been turned by a new, flashy guest at the table — the tea party movement, which has been attracting big crowds, high-profile speakers and money with its message of lower taxes and less government spending.

The New York Times ran a piece on Friday on how "[some of] the Tea Party leaders . . . deliberately avoid discussion of issues like . . . abortion. . . . [They] argue that the country can ill afford the discussion about social issues when it is passing on enormous debts to future generations."

John Piper comments:

Let me see if I understand this term "ill afford."

Is this it? Enormous debt will hurt our children and grandchildren. Therefore don't talk about the lawfulness of whether they can be killed.

Something like that?

View Comments


10 thoughts on “Tea Party Organizers Ignoring Abortion?”

  1. George says:

    Entrusting the fight against abortion to the Republican Party (or any other party for that matter) does not seem like a wise approach to the issue. Definitive and lasting success will probably never come until activists and politicians on both sides of the aisle work together to overturn Roe v. Wade. History gives an example of this in the case of William Wilberforce’s crusade to end the slave trade.

    Rusty Wright of Probe Ministries writes: “Bipartisan cooperation was essential to Wilberforce’s success. He set aside differences on certain issues to collaborate for the greater good. Both political liberals and conservatives joined the abolition cause. Quakers mobilized support. Wilberforce partnered with Jeremy Bentham a founder of Utilitarianism on abolition and prison reform. Utilitarianism, of course, favors the end justifying the means, hardly a biblical value. Yet the two could work together.”

    To see more reasons why we shouldn’t place this vital endeavor in the hands of Republicans check out the post God, not the GOP.

    Also, check out the post, Democrats Against Abortion, which is a commentary on Marjorie Dannenfelser’s op-ed, on the First Things site.

  2. Michael says:

    When I consider the sources – New York TImes, The Washington Post – I find more suspicion than concern. Are they really concerned with the conservative movement? I doubt it. It seems more to me that they are trying to find a reason to start in-fighting in the conservative movement. What is interesting to me, is when someone who cares about abortion comes out, like Sarah Palin, a Tea Party favorite, many conservatives (including many here) followed the media in making her out to be “un-intelligent,” when she is anything but.

  3. donsands says:

    Piper has a way with words, doesn’t he.

    The politician’s mindset, on both sides is politics. They want votes.

    I drove past an abortion clinic today after church, and there were for people praying there. One was kneeling on the sidewalk, two were holding signs, and another was praying; (with a Rosary, I hate to say).
    Funny, I appreciated these dear people trying to stand for unborn people, and yet I was disturbed by them praying to Mary.
    Which is a worse sin, to abort a child, or praying 60 Hail Mary’s, I thought to myself? If they are there next Sunday i think I shall stop and chat with my Roman Catholic neighbors.

  4. Truth Unites... and Divides says:

    As a Christian conservative, I’ve noticed secular fiscal and national security conservatives look down upon social conservatives.

  5. ChrisB says:

    This is like the people who complain that anti-abortion protesters aren’t out protesting child abuse.

    The tea parties are essentially a single-issue group — namely, out of control government growth/spending. If they choose to avoid social issues (especially one as explosive as this), I can understand that. They want to attract the people who are upset about how Washington spends money, and if they start talking about abortion, they will lose some of their audience.

    This is much ado about nothing and probably an attempt by the NYT to damage the tea parties.

  6. chris says:

    The irony of democracy is that the “peeps” believe that the process is open to all at anytime. But in order to maintain the atmosphere, everyone needs to believe that upward mobility is still possible. The socialism and top-heavy banking system of the US is destroying the American eschatology of hope in upward advance, and so the Tea Party is born. Piper is aiming at the wrong issue on this one.

    The church should just start militantly making disciples and then no one will want an abortion. Onward Christian soldiers.

  7. Definitive and lasting success will probably never come until activists and politicians on both sides of the aisle work together to overturn Roe v. Wade. History gives an example of this in the case of William Wilberforce’s crusade to end the slave trade.

    And how many Democrats are going to vote against a pro-abortion health care bill? I do not hear any Democrats calling to end the funding of Planned Parenthood, something I think Tea Party activists might support. The Democratic Party is ran by pro-abortion absolutists and there can be no compromise with that until Liberalism ceases to have a dominating effect on their policies.

    You see, Democrats may talk about finding “common ground” on abortion, but that is pure deception. And why do they have to attack pro-life Crisis Pregnancy Centers or pro-life adoption agencies? The Democratic Party is advocating the sins unequivocally condemned in the Bible, particularly the ones during the wicked reign of King Manasseh.

  8. j pilgrim says:

    Piper’s statement is like being offended that nobody’s talking about the size of a baseball in a conversation about the length of basepaths. Are both issues related to the game of baseball? Yes. Are both issues crucial? Yep. Will you define baseball without talking about both issues? No.

    Or to put it another way: why do books have chapters?

Comments are closed.

Search this blog


Justin Taylor photo

Justin Taylor, PhD

Justin Taylor is executive vice president of book publishing and book publisher for Crossway and blogs at Between Two Worlds. You can follow him on Twitter.

Justin Taylor's Books