Invoking Lincoln

In his article on the Washington Post's "On Faith" page, evangelical leader Lou Engle ruminates on his fear of God's reprisal on the United States for legalizing abortion—particularly relating to new President Barack Obama's promise to sign the Freedom of Choice Act, which as Engle argues, "will remove every restriction of abortion from conception to possibly born alive infants."

To emphasize his opinion, Engle invokes the words of President Abraham Lincoln, on whose Bible Obama was sworn in as President. Lincoln's second inaugural address (parts of which are engraved in the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C.) evaluated the  massive bloodshed of the Civil War as God's punishment of a nation that had been corrupted and stained by the horrors of slavery, and for becoming "a nation who refused to live according to God's laws." Engle cleverly links the bloodshed of the Civil War to the "bloodshed," or death of 48 million unborn children since Roe v. Wade in 1973. Engle agrees wholeheartedly with this part of Lincoln's speech—the major death toll of the Civil War was not a product of political or social struggle, but a punitive measure enacted by God to reprimand an unruly and degenerative society. Thus, he argues, what should we expect from God as American citizens who have allowed the legal deaths of millions of children? 

(side note: I'd be interested to learn what Engle has to say about the deaths of thousands of American soldiers in Vietnam and other wars and catastrophes—what societal ill was God curing during those conflicts? I hope he's not wallowing in the same sort of apocalyptic nonsense as Pat Robertson and the late Jerry Falwell)

Citing eminent figures such as Lincoln seems to be a good journalistic move. People generally characterize Lincoln as a national hero and an admirable man. However, I feel that Engle loses some credibility in making this statement: "The Laws of God are good for society and for the well being of its people." This incendiary comment seems ironic, as Engle is criticizing Obama, the leader of a nation that guarantees a separation of church and state. Obviously, a large percentage of the population doesn't associate itself with any particular religion, so the idea of "the Laws of God" aren't applicable to them. 

In a representative democratic government, the best a leader can do is try to account for the well being of his people. The Freedom of Choice act, as Obama has posited, would make abortion "rare", but put the rights of the individuals above the laws of the nation or of the states. Implied in this law is the belief that the individual woman in absolute need of an abortion would be able to have that need met. I think it's safe to assume that Obama doesn't "support" abortion as alternative to safe sex and responsible child raising, but he understands that it is a necessary, albeit extreme means for the livelihood of American citizens. Comparing the horrors of war to a difficult personal choice is ludicrous—Engle seems to believe that we are living in a theocracy wherein God's laws are the established order. To be certain, abortion is and should remain a "rare option," but outlawing it in the name of God should never come to pass in this country.