What is a Christian nowadays? If it is being gay and wanting to abort babies up until the point of delivery, we may have some redefining to do.
Pete Buttigieg has become a popular name lately due to his extreme remarks while running for the 2020 presidential nomination. Buttigieg, mayor of South Bend, Indiana, had previously shared that he was an Episcopalian. He did so, in fact, in the context of defending his homosexuality.
“That’s the thing that I wish the Mike Pences of the world would understand,” Buttigieg said of the vice president, who stands for traditional marriage. “That if you have a problem with who I am, your problem is not with me. Your quarrel, sir, is with my creator.”
Now Buttigieg has taken the definition of his faith even farther, recently saying that he believes there should be absolutely no limits on abortion.
“You know,” he told Fox News anchor Chris Wallace, after he pressed into defining his abortion stance, “I think the dialogue has gotten so caught up on when you draw the line that we’ve gotten away from the fundamental question of who gets to draw the line.”
“And I trust women to draw the line,” he said. What a clever, pandering statement.
Buttigieg then went on to what some may see as a slippery slope, assuming that the women who have late-term abortions were intending to keep the baby but had some unforeseen difficulty arise.
Saying that mothers that have late-term abortions were “expecting to carry it to term,” but for some reason, are faced with making the “impossible, unthinkable choice” to terminate their pregnancies, Buttitgieg then said: "The bottom line is, as horrible as that choice is, that woman, that family, may seek spiritual guidance, they may seek medical guidance, but that decision isn’t going to be made any better, medically or morally, because the government is dictating how that decision should be made."
The weird thing about that statement is: 1) assuming that women only get late-term abortions for unexpected circumstances (i.e., health reasons with the baby or mother); and 2) calling the choice "horrible." The first goes against the feminist underpinning of the no-holds-barred abortion stance which states that abortion should happen at any time for any reason, because it is the mother's body and choice. This argument seeks to cast away any shame from aborting a baby late-term, even if both baby and mother are perfectly healthy.
The second issue, calling it "horrible", pretty clearly implies that there is something morally wrong with abortion. Why else would the choice be "horrible?" In any event, we feel that Mayor Pete's attempt to hold the Christian faith in one hand and abortion and homosexuality in the other is quite an impossible reach.
What's to be seen, however, is how the American people take to his message. What do you think of Buttigieg's newfangled definition of faith and morality? Share your thoughts in the comments! Thank you!