On a recent episode of MSNBC’s “Andrea Mitchell Reports,” host Alex Witt suggested that pro-life laws violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, saying:
[T]here’s supposed to be separation of church and state in our system of government, a tenet of the First Amendment known as the Establishment Clause, which states, “Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion,” but the issue of abortion makes you question if that’s the case.
Her hypothesis betrays her ignorance of the philosophical and moral foundations of pro-life legal protections, and possibly her ignorance of the science regarding when new life begins, as well.
Pro-life Laws (and Beliefs) Are Not Intrinsically Religious
Though many abortion advocates have argued that pro-life laws and/or beliefs are religious by definition, this is not even remotely true.
Atheist Monica Snyder, executive director of Secular Pro Life, has stated: “The belief that abortion is wrong is not exclusive to the Bible — or to any one worldview, theistic, secular, or otherwise.”
In a Live Action video on this subject, Snyder points out that the central argument against abortion – which is founded upon logical reasoning – does not rely upon or refer to religion in any way. This argument, simply put, is: It’s wrong to kill innocent human beings. Abortion kills innocent human beings; therefore, abortion is wrong.
Likewise, the conviction that killing innocent human beings is wrong is not inherently religious. Human civilizations all over the world and throughout history have prohibited and punished this practice.
Science, Not Religion
In order to kill something, it must first be alive. And some abortion advocates have insisted that abortion is not actually an act of killing by arguing that the “belief” that life begins in the womb is religious in nature.
But this is not a “belief” – it’s a fact.
Scientific journals and textbooks have long upheld the truth that a unique, living, individual organism is generated when gametes fuse, i.e., at fertilization.
But one need look no further than an ordinary dictionary to deduce that preborn children are living creatures. Merriam-Webster defines “life” as “an organismic state characterized by capacity for metabolism, growth, reaction to stimuli, and reproduction” (emphasis added).
Human beings in the womb grow rapidly by means of the reproduction (or duplication) of cells (known as mitosis), which is powered by metabolic processes. And the Endowment for Human Development notes that preborn children react to stimuli – they respond to touch as early as 15 weeks post-fertilization, and to sounds by 22 weeks.
Clearly children in-utero meet all of the criteria defining “life.” They are indisputably alive, and abortion kills them. Belief in any particular religion is not required to recognize this reality – even abortionists admit this fact.
Although most religions affirm that preborn children are alive and innocent, and that it is therefore wrong to kill them, this does not mean that these are religious concepts. Religion didn’t create these concepts. Rather, religion embraced these ideas – they are distinct realities, and various religions have simply recognized them.
The Establishment Clause
But what about the Establishment Clause? What is it, and is it relevant to the discussion of pro-life laws?
The initial portion of the First Amendment commonly referred to as the Establishment Clause states: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof[.]”
According to the National Constitution Center: “After Independence, there was widespread agreement that there should be no nationally established church. The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, principally authored by James Madison, reflects this consensus.”
The Freedom Forum also states that the Establishment Clause “has been interpreted by the U.S. Supreme Court to prevent government from either advancing (that is, establishing) or hindering religion[.]”
As previously stated, the fact that preborn children are alive, and that abortion kills them, is a matter of fact, not religious belief. Because pro-life laws are based upon these facts, they are not religious in nature. Therefore, the Establishment Clause does not prohibit the government from enforcing them – in fact, it is totally irrelevant to this issue.
Alex Witt’s argument, like so many others aimed at excusing and promoting the violence of abortion, has no basis in fact or reason.
