Trending Today ...
Talent show will spotlight youth

LAKE HAVASU CITY – Lake Havasu Parks and

Don’t count on a recount to change the

WASHINGTON (AP) — With the American electorate so

Security guard arrested after unauthorized shooting

LAKE HAVASU CITY – Lake Havasu City police

Walk Away from Drugs event set in BHC

BULLHEAD CITY - The Bullhead City Police and

Area agencies prepare for mock emergency drill

KINGMAN — Public safety organizations throughout the country develop

Town Hall – Not at all

Dear Editor, By now, after almost a full

Thank you for reading The Standard newspaper online!

Man Up?

A woman’s right to choose to have an abortion has been a well-trodden debate for decades now and most people, male and female, no doubt, have a firmly established view. One is either for it or against it. No matter what, the conversation is not going away.

From a religious viewpoint, nearly all abortions are an anathema to scripture and God. However, since not all adhere to a religious ideology, we have a system whereby the consent of the governed becomes the rule of law. One person, one vote.

Here is where I think it may be provocative.

To what extent does a man have a “choice” when it comes to his unborn child? For instance, if a man does not want the child aborted, but the woman does, the court has ruled that the woman’s right supersedes the man’s objections (Planned Parenthood v. Danforth) and also in subsequent cases, his notification rights as well.

Additionally, if a man wants the child aborted, but the woman chooses to carry the baby to term, the court has ruled that the man is equally responsible for the financial needs of the child going forward once born. A man cannot “abort” his financial obligation if his unwanted child is brought to term by the pregnant woman (Dubay v. Wells).

On their respective surfaces, these decisions seem incongruent. Nevertheless, it is the situation as it lies now, and one can dig deeper into the rationale of each court’s opinion if they so choose.

As such, this is why caution should be used when men engage in sexual relationships. As enjoyable as intimacy is for both partners, scriptural guardrails exist to ensure that secular law need not be the arbiter of the abortion dilemma. A biblical understanding of a man’s responsibility is outlined with clarity i.e., courting, marriage, children.

In a relatively permissive society that sometimes celebrates body counts, the extreme downside seems to outweigh the momentary pleasures or accolade. This seems self-evident, yet almost universally ignored.

Illustratively, I wish I could go back to when I was a young man in my late teens. I dated a girl who became pregnant despite my taking birth control precautions. When it was revealed to me, my mindset was like many in my generation; the child should be aborted—and it was.

Today, this is my deepest lifelong regret. While I have come to terms with it by God’s grace, it has been the singular issue that has defined the worst of who I was and am (at least so far…).

My specific advice to men is, do not depend on the courts, the clinics, or your companion, to decide the matter. Follow the pattern established by God.

Regardless of whether you would keep or abort a child, just as it was in decades past, your voice is legally moot either way. Maybe this is as it should be, but why risk having such an important decision made by another? You might regret it one day.

Kent Simmons is the pastor of Canyon Community Church in Kingman, AZ.