William Wilberforce is one of my few heroes. He was a British Parliamentarian, and the leader in the abolition of the slave trade in Europe. I also consider him to be, though less recognized as, a hero of the fruits of the Reformation and the ideals of the Reformers. (Yet that is a digression I will not continue at this present moment).
Wilberforce began his career as a very young member of parliament and quickly rose to the prestigious seat for the county of Yorkshire. He was considered one of the most eloquent and passionate members of parliament, and one of the most promising of the youngest members.
At a sudden turning point in Wilberforce's life, he committed himself to Christ and began to consider himself an evangelical. It is my understanding of his story that in that time, his passion for his faith led him to inner turmoil about the future course his life should take. He was tormented as a victim of the prevalent neo-platonism that plagued the Church in that day (and has crept into the church again), an attitude that serving the Lord only truly comes through "higher callings" such as pastorship or mission work. His mentor John Newton (who wrote the hymn, "Amazing Grace") encouraged him to remain in politics, and proposed that God may have put him in politics for a reason.
Wilberforce, under the encouragement of other abolitionists, soon became the leading member of the Abolitionist movement. For twelve years he worked to pass legislation to outlaw slavery. He faced much adversity and many obstacles, but finally, his bill passed. The ball was then rolling to end slavery worldwide.
There are many ways I could use Wilberforce's story to launch into something relating to this campaign, but I want to stick to something very specific. I may return to Wilberforce's story for other corresponding thoughts later.
The issue of slavery has been a topic very much on my mind as of late. I have a specific fascination with how the sins of society appear in our day to day lives. I personally feel that the pop-culture attitudes prevalent in our public schools has bred a slavery like mentality in which certain people exploit others in order to boost their popularity. Making someone feel left out, or feel inferior, is a good way to boost your popularity. All such thoughts put aside, I am fascinated with my longing to understand the basic concepts behind the evils of slavery.
It is quite amazing to me how long it took for slavery to become outlawed in our own nation. Certainly, our economy was based upon slavery and a sudden change just wouldn't have been on anyone's mind at all at the time. But when I look at the principles our country was based upon, I wonder why it took so much time. We believe that every man should be free, in that he should be able to make himself wholly subject to God and not to another man or government. His property, his pursuit of happiness, his life, is all left to him to do with as he pleases and ultimately up to him to offer to God without any other person's interference. The principle of slavery was the exact same principle we were fighting against in the revolution. The ability to be free.
Yet, the work of justice never completes itself in one instant, it is a battle we are constantly fighting and oftentimes losing. Although I do not know of another Wilberforce living among us in the present age, I am attracted to Duncan Hunter because I see the same convictions and spirit of Wilberforce alive in him.
Most specifically, I consider the issue of abortion. Although in the political realm and even among some of my peers the pro-life stance is not very popular, it is a stance I religiously support and defend. The same thing happened in Wilberforce's time. Excuse after excuse was poised as to why the slave trade should continue. Many argued that it would destroy their economy (and their reasoning was valid for the most part), others argued that the slaves were too dumb and too docile to have any objection to the trade in the first place. Despite critics, Wilberforce tried over and over again to pass his bill to end the slave trade. And today, despite the controversey and the critics, one of my modern heroes has continued the fight to end the despicable practice of abortion.
Congressman Hunter has been the author (I believe at least 5 times) of the 'Life at Conception Act' which is an act that, if passed, would define life as beginning at conception. If that happened, the 14th amendment would apply to protecting the lives of the unborn. An admission made by the court in their Roe v. Wade ruling.
As I'm sure we have all heard, critics have claimed that people should have the choice as to what to do with their own bodies, or that it is unconstitutional to enforce a religious belief. I would respond with the same reasons I believe slavery is wrong and should be outlawed as it is:
1. Just like with slavery, no man has the right to 'become god' over another man by owning their lives or their work. Abortion takes the lives of those who are (at the very least) potential humans. They are innocent lives, not subject to the state's right of capital punishment. For them to be killed so violently is to take a life that is not yours to take, and a complete usurpation of their Natural (or God-given rights) which are protected by the Constituion and heralded by the Declaration of Independence. The Constitution does not guarantee choice, it guarantees freedom until our freedom usurps someone else's rights. That's exactly what abortion does, to the fullest and most brutal extents.
2. To the 'legislation of morality' argument, I simply say that there is no law, policy, ideal, value, or concept that is not driven by some ideology and/or religion. The first amendment does not prohibit the enforcement against actions that are considered wrong under a certain ideology, merely that no idea must be forced on anyone. Outlawing murder is making a moral evaluation based upon a ideology, but it is not forcing you to believe murder is wrong. The same is so of abortion. Outlawing it does not force anyone to believe anything. The outlawing of slavery was argued as a Christian ideal, and Scripture was used to support the argument. Does that make outlawing slavery unconstitutional?
As you can see, the arguments and beliefs that fueled the abolition movement are fundamental to the pro-life movement. That is why I have a problem with people like Giuliani, Fred Thompson, Mitt Romney, and Ron Paul who advocate that abortion should be a state issue. It is an issue that goes to the core of our Constitutional, foundational beliefs. Duncan Hunter understands this.
He has said this, "The Founding Fathers developed these [First Amendment] clauses to guarantee the right of all citizens to worship and to protect the church from the state, not to strip religion from the everyday lives of Americans. "
The following is a description of the Right to Life bill which he authored:
"For more than thirty years, nine unelected men and women on the Supreme Court have played God with innocent human life.
The result has been a brutal holocaust that has claimed the lives of more than 45 million innocent and helpless unborn children in America.
In 1973, the U.S. Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade ruling forced abortion-on-demand down our nation's throat.
As a result, many pro-lifers resigned themselves to protecting a life here and there -- passing laws which slightly control abortion in the most outrageous cases. And other pro-life organizations always tiptoed around the Supreme Court, hoping they wouldn't be offended.
Life at Conception Act Follows the High Court's Instructions To Define When Life Begins
Now the time to grovel before the Supreme Court is over.
Working from what the Supreme Court ruled in Roe, pro-life lawmakers can pass a Life at Conception Act and end abortion by using the Constitution instead of amending it.
A simple majority vote is all that is needed to pass a Life at Conception Act as opposed to the two-thirds required to add a Constitutional amendment.
When the Supreme Court handed down its now-infamous Roe v. Wade decision, it did so based on a new, previously undefined "right of privacy" which it "discovered" in so-called "emanations" of "penumbrae" of the Constitution.
Of course, as constitutional law it was a disaster. But never once did the Supreme Court declare abortion itself to be a Constitutional right.
Instead the Supreme Court said:
"We need not resolve the difficult question of when life begins . . . the judiciary at this point in the development of man''s knowledg, is not in a position to speculate as to the answer."
Representative Duncan Hunter's (R-CA) Life at Conception Act [H.R. 618] was introduced in the House of Representatives on the 34th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade, January 22, 2007, with a record 64 original cosponsors. "
(http://www.prolifealliance.com/life%20at%20conception%20act.htm )
----
I was praying the other day with the hope that God would raise up a modern day Wilberforce for ending the practice of abortion. Though I can not yet say anyone is the next Wilberforce, I do know from what I have seen that the Wilberforce spirit resides in Duncan Hunter. I become ecstatic when I think that the Lord has blessed this election with a candidate that carries the same spirit as William Wilberforce, and I can't wait to see him in the Oval Office.
"And, sir, when we think of eternity, and of the future consequences of all human conduct, what is there in this life that should make any man contradict the dictates of his conscience, the principles of justice, the laws of religion, and of God?" -William Wilberforce
Ron Paul is a COSPONSOR of the very bill you are talking about in this article. Did you even read the bill?
"Pro-lifers are urged to call (202) 224-3121 and insist that their Congressman cosponsor Representative Ron Paul's Sanctity of Life Act of 2007 [H.R. 1094] today."
Are your personal politics more important than being honest?
sigh...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xNhOYWTNNOM