Biola's student-run newspaper
for 80 years

Trump supports March for Life

“The most pro-life President in American history” encroaches on right to liberty.  |  Photo Courtesy of 


According to Fox News, on Friday Jan. 19, President Donald Trump gave a speech at the Rose Garden, which was live-streamed to those at the March for Life at the National Mall.


“The first-ever live speech by a president to the pro-life activists of the annual March for Life rally in Washington,” Fox News said.

Many Americans are not surprised that Trump is the first president to openly support and speak at a pro-life—or pro-choice—rally, as throughout his presidency he has rarely made it a point to conceal his socio-political opinions.

The “most pro-life President in American history” delivered a speech on the United States’ abortion laws and discussed the allowance of late term abortions. He then addressed a select portion of the Declaration of Independence, stating within his administration they will always:

“Defend the very first right [of Americans] and that is the right to life.”

What the president neglected to include, in a manner that decontextualized a portion of the document, are the words that follow directly after Life—liberty, freedom to choose and vote and live as you please.

A restrictionist government is non-democratic. Christians are not required to get abortions if the law stays untouched. It would not encroach our rights if a woman in Texas gets an abortion. However, those who seek the ending of a pregnancy, whether for medical reasons or personal, will have their rights to freedom of choice encroached.


Historically, women in desperation have turned to other means for desired abortion or pregnancy prevention. Parsley, sage, rosemary and thyme for herbal contraceptive. A rusty knife, a coat hanger, a flight of stairs—we have all heard such tragic stories.

If we as Christians value all life, who are we to vote in a manner that might possibly endanger the life, safety and liberty of the mother? Taking away trusted medical procedures—or birth control—has never stopped a woman.

Let me say, I would never choose to have an abortion. I do believe that a baby is a baby upon conception and would never terminate that life.

But that is my perogative. My body and my choice belong to me. In a free America, I can choose to keep my baby. Just as without the presence of Christ-influenced morals, I should possess the freedom to choose the opposite. A non-Christian woman deserves the same rights. Who are we to affect another’s entire life?


I believe Christ planned each life with intention. I believe in the beauty and precious nature of life, and I wish every woman and man to see that as well. There is a purpose in all life—born, unborn, stillborn and disabled. Additionally, Christians maintain our role and right to vote according to our beliefs. We cannot deny that. However, does a law preventing abortion—at any amount of weeks—promote democracy? Is it our right to impose our beliefs and morals upon those who have not accepted them?

However, we are not going to convince others of the grace and love of Christ, nor the immense amount of care he took in forming each individual hair on each individual head by shooting up an abortion clinic—or by passing a limiting abortion bill.


Your Turn.  Post a Comment

  1. Jared Dobbs

    You believe at once that your baby would be a baby upon conception, but that it is each woman's body and each woman's choice. Are you saying that each mother is free to determine for herself whether she is carrying a baby or a mere lump of tissue?

    If you reject the pro-life viewpoint, you could alternatively argue that your baby would be in a similar situation as any other mother's--that is, none of the unborn are human. Then we would have to think about what distinguishes a seven-month old human fetus from a newborn in order to avoid endorsing infanticide.

    But I would avoid the subjectivist approach if I were you. February 7, 2018

  2. Impose Morality?

    Is it our right to impose our beliefs and morals upon those who have not accepted them?

    The answer is YES!!!

    Would you please think through that question you asked outside the hot button topic of abortion? Can you see how ridiculous it is to say we should not impose beliefs and morals? Not “we” as Christians but citizens in general.

    There are plenty of people whose morals and beliefs do not restrict them from any number of heinous crimes including murder, rape, child pornography, etc. Is it our right to impose our beliefs and morals upon those who have not accepted those things are immoral? Of course it is.
    February 8, 2018

  3. John Wesley Reid

    Ashley, what is the premise to your position on life at conception? Or rather, do you believe that your position is absolute or just an opinion? If you believe it is absolute then how can you disagree that we should eliminate abortion, since you clearly believe that the fetus, upon conception, is a human?

    Also, to your argument about “if we are truly pro-life then we’d be concerned about women in desperation”...Ashely, if we keep abortion legal to save the lives of women who would choose alternative abortion methods that harm them, then hoe does that make us pro-life? Allowing abortion may help the women who take alternative approaches, but it ensures the death of the babies.

    As a former Chimes writer, I am very saddened that Chimes would allow this piece to be written. Copy editors, why aren’t you informing her of the flawed logic? Syntax? Cmon guys... February 10, 2018

Your email will not be published as part of your comment.


Biola University
13800 Biola Ave. La Mirada, CA 90639
© Biola University, Inc. All Rights Reserved.