Christian or Not

In Susan Pace Hamill’s article, “Alabama’s not truly pro-life”, she makes the argument that being pro-life is more than just passing a law to ban abortion, but extends to legislation to support the child throughout his/her childhood as well, ensuring a genuinely positive quality of life. I feel that the morality of this cause is not in question, but instead that perhaps the method of implementation itself is flawed, and without authentic religious foundation.

Susan Hamill’s initial statements seek to extend the commonly accepted boundaries of the term “pro-life” from the general concerns of the unborn to the general concerns of all children and their caregivers. Proper healthcare and housing is naturally a concern, but also access to job training, substance abuse programs, and education for the parents as well. I must admit, it is an encouraging idea. I would agree that a healthy childhood rests in a stable family and all these things would make great strides toward providing the stability that child would need.
These new ideas are packaged into the belief that all Christians are pro-life, and to be pro-life is to want more than just a ban on abortion, backed up by the biblical reference of “love God with all your heart and your neighbor as yourself.” The problem seems to be that many Christians don’t embrace this new idea entirely because most citizens in the higher income brackets (Christian or not) are not willing to bear the tax costs of implementing these new programs, so passing legislation would be difficult. Hamill and her supporters are working hard to change this, and are optimistic for the future.
In light of all this, I have some very large questions for Susan Hamill and her followers. Why do Christians need any kind of legislation passed to start making a difference now? The argument could be made that churches have little enough spare money with their own expenses, but there are many churches in Alabama whose income outweigh their own needs. Faith Chapel Christian Center in Wylam, Alabama is spending $15 Million to build a bowling alley, an athletic center, a teen disco, and an adult night club. Is this a more Christian ambition than helping poor children? Many churches (with a very distinct emphasis on the word many) have annual incomes in the tens of millions or better. If these kinds of churches could each help just one family (Christian or not) with their struggles in poverty, a great difference would be made. Let alone the fact that many churches have the financial ability to help several families. Traditionally, social and poverty issues were concerns the church would eagerly help with, but where is that enthusiasm now?
The truth is Susan Hamill was right when she said that those with higher wealth (Christian or not) were unwilling to bear the cost of a pro-life community. Sadly, I feel that she must look upon the Christian organization with that knowledge, knowing that its vast monetary capability will likely be spent on a multi-million dollar annex, or perhaps an adult night club. I applaud the sanguine determination she has for her cause, but remain pessimistic to the willingness of the Christian community to make this happen themselves, whether or not legislation is passed.
If the members of the Christian community cannot bring themselves to embrace the teachings of their own religion, learn to give without question to anyone needy, to love all as they love themselves, what is left to say for their cause? Should legislation be passed that even they themselves are unwilling put into motion? Would God bless such a selfish action? Maybe not, but who is to say God doesn’t want another teen disco to spread his word? Still, I would agree that a stable childhood would be good for anyone, Christian or not.