Affirmations and Denials Regarding Abolitionist Terms and Other Controversial Subjects

Doing what we do, false and sometimes strange accusations come with the territory. The vast majority are not worth addressing, but a handful of slanderous charges in recent weeks have risen to such a level that a response is necessary.

Thus far, Free the States staff members have combatted these accusations using their personal social media pages, but this article will be the last time we address the subject for the foreseeable future. After this, we will be moving past it to the important work there is to be done.

Abolitionist Terminology

We Affirm that distinguishing the Abolitionist Movement from the Pro-Life Movement is crucial to clearly communicating the ideological distinctions between the tenets of abolitionism and the tenets of pro-lifeism; and that the maintenance of this ideological distinction is crucial toward people understanding the difference between abolitionism and pro-lifeism, abolition bills and pro-life bills, abolitionist candidates and pro-life candidates. People cannot be exhorted toward the correct direction if they do not clearly understand the difference between the two different directions they can go. Fighting over who gets to use the term “pro-life” will lead to confusion and will stunt the growth of the movement.

We Affirm that people understanding the difference between these two categories is crucial to the success of abolitionist ideas, legislation, and candidates.

For more info on these affirmations, see:

• Why Abolitionists Need to Use the A-Word: The Liberator Podcast #10
• Pro-Life Leaders Try to Blur the Lines Between Pro-Life and Abolition
• Why You Should Say, ‘I am an Abolitionist’

We Deny that those who affirm the tenets of abolitionism but choose to use a different label, including “pro-life,” are in sin for that unwise decision.

We Deny that there is anything petty, tribal, or prideful about our insistence on keeping these two categories clearly separate. On the contrary, it is often for petty, tribal, and/or prideful reasons that people who have come to embrace the tenets of abolitionism insist on still calling themselves “pro-life.” Pro-life pride in particular plays a big role here.

We Deny that an individual or organization choosing to identify as “pro-life” is enough reason to not partner with them. We are willing to work with such people and organizations. However, some who profess to adhere to abolitionist ideologies but insist on identifying as “pro-life” are resisting abolitionist terminology in part because they are resisting aspects of abolitionism. These ideological differences may or may not be reason enough not to partner in the battle to abolish abortion with such people depending on the case.

Idolatry

We Affirm, with R.C. Sproul, that “When the church is silent in the midst of a holocaust, she ceases to be a real church.” Busyness with other things, even important kingdom endeavors, is no excuse for being apathetic regarding a present holocaust. It’s not that there are no other important kingdom causes and occupations to attend to; it’s that Holocausts take priority over nearly all of it. We must live like our preborn neighbors are actually image bearers.

We Deny that idolatry of abolitionism is a widespread problem in the Abolitionist Movement. Abolitionism is simply the gospel applied to the evil of the age. The gospel and obedience to Christ is our highest objective. An abolitionist who elevates anything above the gospel of Jesus Christ ceases to be a real abolitionist. Being gospel-centered is a non-negotiable tenet of our movement. This is a rare trait in a political movement. Virtually every political movement in existence is rooted in ecumenicism and big tent philosophies which are viewed by worldly thinkers as the only way to social and political change. Nearly all of the major pro-life organizations are officially secular organizations, and they refuse to integrate the gospel into their mission for fear of being labeled a religious movement by abortion supporters. They elevate their carnal objectives and big tent philosophy above obedience to the gospel and great commission. In viewing the proclamation of the gospel of the kingdom as the answer to our cultural and political woes, the Abolitionist Movement stands virtually alone in the political world. Accordingly, there is hardly a social or political movement on earth which it would be more unfair to accuse of idolatry.

Incrementalists As Brothers and Sisters

We Affirm that an incrementalist approach toward fighting the abortion holocaust (ie. a strategy of changing abortion law by degrees) is unbiblical and that it delays the abolition of abortion.

We Affirm that pro-life incrementalist politicians, lobbyists, organizations, thought leaders, and the pro-lifers who support them are the primary obstacles to the abolition of abortion in states like Oklahoma, Texas, Idaho, Indiana, Arizona, South Carolina, Missouri, and others where pro-life Republicans control all the levers of power in the State government.

For more information regarding these affirmations, see:

• The Biblical Arguments for Abolitionism: The Liberator Podcast #4
• The Heterodoxy of the Pro-Life Movement
• Incrementalism Delays Repentance

We Deny the idea that pro-life incrementalists cannot be saved. On the contrary, there are many well-meaning, born again believers in the Pro-Life Movement. It is crazy that we have to clarify of our view on this, but unfortunately, we do.

Seeking Credit

We Affirm that it is our desire that when abortion is abolished, commentators and historians and everyone else knows that it was abolished because the Church of Jesus Christ awoke from its apathy and rejected worldly pragmatism by embracing the tenets of abolitionism. That this occurs will be an important testimony for future generations to look at and learn from as they fight the evil of their age. The spread of the tenets of abolitionism would change the world. That credit is not given to worldly compromisers, but rather to the Church and the tenets of abolitionism (which are rooted in scripture), is very important. This is one of many reasons we draw clear distinctions between the Abolitionist Movement and the Pro-Life Movement.

We Deny that our insistence on drawing clear distinctions or on calling the Pro-Life Movement to repentance has anything to do with “youthful vanity,” desiring credit for ourselves, or building our own reputations and kingdoms. On the contrary, the Pro-Life Movement is where the money, political connections, and huge platforms are. Those seeking large platforms and influential partnerships will be drawn to identify with the Pro-Life Movement. Those willing to speak the hard truth without regard for access to larger platforms and bigger tents will be drawn to the Abolitionist Movement. This fact is changing over time as the Abolitionist Movement grows more and more influential, but there are still far more establishment political connections and donations to be had in the Pro-Life Movement than the Abolitionist Movement.

Free the States founder Russell Hunter is sometimes on the receiving end of this particular accusation. On a personal note regarding this subject, I have never worked with someone less interested in credit, public approval, and personal kingdom building. Virtually all organizations — including Christian organizations — operate for the growth of the platform of the CEO. Yet Russell, who started the Abolitionist Movement and founded Free the States, takes every opportunity to platform others instead of himself. While I would naturally give him radio and podcast appearances that we are offered, he often tells me that people need to know me better and that I should do them. He doesn’t like putting his name on things. He encourages us to speak our mind in meetings even if we disagree with him. Russell is zealous for the spread of the tenets of abolitionism, but has no regard for his own reputation and name. He is the least credit-seeking leader I’ve ever worked with.