No truce in abortion debate

Linda Thorson

Park River

Why is former Lt. Gov. Lloyd Omdahl advocating a truce in the abortion debate?

Omdahl gives two reasons for his desire for an armistice: 1) Because both sides of the abortion debate show no sign of compromise, and 2) because the debate causes “social turmoil.”

Think about it. Who would gain the most with a truce? A truce would silence the outrage over the sales of aborted baby parts financially supporting Democrats’ election campaigns. A truce would ignore U.S. Sen. Heidi Heitkamp’s 2012 opinion that late-term abortions should be illegal except when necessary to save the life of the mother, which was changed in 2015 to oppose the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act that bans abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy.

A truce would freely allow Sen. Heitkamp to vote to continue sending taxpayer dollars to Planned Parenthood, the nation’s largest abortion enterprise. (It is worth noting that Harvard Political Review reported in 2012 that Heitkamp’s“second largest campaign contributor” was Planned Parenthood.)

What if an armistice was welcomed during the slavery debate due to the lack of political agreement? Or what if an armistice was welcomed during the Holocaust, because the Germans found it easier to ignore the issue than to help the Jewish people?

Be aware. Lloyd’s convoluted solution of an armistice is dangerous. Dr. Alveda King, the niece of Dr. Martin Luther King ,Jr., has said, “Abortion hurts women and kills a baby.” Mr. Omdahl clearly ignores this truth.

As Christians, our role in the world isn’t to muffle the cries of those who are dying, it is to reveal the truth about the sanctity of life and to rescue those who are in need of love and support. The call for an armistice in the battle for life is the utmost un-Christlike position to hold.

COMMENTS