What I am about to say will either be seen as a moderate approach to a difficult problem or as a sellout heretic to a fundamental truth. So, buckle up.

Rarely do I interject myself into politics, especially here. But there is a problem that is overlapping between politics and religion that both people of faith and people opposed need some clarity and perhaps compromise.

It is not our borders, inflation, or geopolitical wars. It is not who defines gender or whether a person can be a “furry” (look it up—crazy).

In short, it is the issue regarding a woman’s right to have a pharmaceutical or surgical abortion after becoming pregnant.

Here, it is important to discern between a religious understanding and a political one. Otherwise, this singular issue will further assist us in sociopolitical isolation from one another. And, because we therefore become single issue voters, we may throw the baby out with the bathwater (I know, a terrible idiom).

For purposes of definition, devout Christians hold that abortion for any other reason except the life of the mother is immoral according to biblical precepts. Those holding to nearly unrestrained rights regarding reproductive autonomy hold that a woman possesses sovereign control of her body at any point in the pregnancy including the outcome of the unborn child or fetus as they prefer.

These profoundly divergent views are implacable—at least so far.

For people of a religious bent and people concerned with individual autonomy, we need to perhaps discern what can be “gained” by both sides if we are reasonable. If we choose not to work together, we will deepen our house divided.

Like it or not, our nation is a republic not a theocracy. We have already agreed that the will of the people is the guiding force for our way of living. People decide, not God.

To be sure, many of founders were deeply religious and based their ideas about humanity in the light of God’s i.e., “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed…”

Whether we chose to base our morals upon God’s or upon a different ideology, most agree that our founders wrestled with the concern of overlapping politics and religion.

Having said this, is there a compromise that both sides of the issue can agree, even while holding their noses?

For those in the biblical/religious camp, it is time to take what we can get. In an increasingly secular society, the idea that restrictive abortion rights will prevail in the long run is misplaced. Far too many will never cede their rights altogether in this area. We will never be able to legislate morality.

For those in the camp of unfettered reproductive rights, you will probably win the day, but lose the war. If single issues such as abortion rights cloud your judgement in other areas politic, you may rue the day of your religious zeal.

Learn from us… we who hold steadfastly to the sanctity of life, have lost the greater battle of the minds and hearts of the people.

Soon, you may, too.

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