My news feed the last several mornings has chronicled the ups-and-downs of the “Arkansas Human Heartbeat Protection Act.” Passed by the state’s senate and house, the bill was promptly vetoed by governor Mike Beebe. He explains his decision to veto this way:

“Because it would impose a ban on a woman’s right to choose an elective, nontherapeutic abortion well before viability, Senate Bill 134 blatantly contradicts the United States Constitution, as interpreted by the Supreme Court. When I was sworn in as governor I took an oath to preserve, protect and defend both the Arkansas Constitution and the Constitution of the United States. I take that oath seriously.”

From another article reporting on the events:

Pro-choice advocates have called the Arkansas abortion bill the “most extreme” in the nation.

“We hope that the House has the courage and principle to vote down this shameful measure, by which politicians seek to usurp private medical decisions that a woman needs to make with her family and her doctor,” said Talcott Camp, deputy director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s Reproductive Freedom Project.

What, exactly, does this “extreme” measure prohibit? If a fetal heartbeat is detected using an abdominal ultrasound, and if the pregnancy is not the result of rape or incest, and if the mother’s life is not endangered by the pregnancy, and if the baby is not detected to have a “highly lethal” disorder, an abortion will not be permitted legally.

In the last few years, Christians have begun to use the phrases “culture of life” and “culture of death” to describe the two opposing positions on abortion. While “culture of life” accurately describes those in the pro-life movement, I do not believe “culture of death” provides as clear a description of pro-choice advocates, even if it does reflect the results of their position.

“Culture of life” is appropriate because it identifies both the supreme end of the movement (or primary objective) and because it identifies that which, for this issue, occupies the highest position of authority: life.

Personal happiness is a value about which pro-lifers are deeply concerned, yet we believe that life itself occupies a more supreme position. Likewise, the concept of “quality of life” is meaningful to those in the pro-life camp, but even it is not as ultimately significant as life itself. When we have to make decisions about life and death, and when all considerations are weighed, we believe that life itself is an almost unsurpassable good. Therefore, as a descriptive term, “culture of life” properly reflects the submission of nearly all other factors to one other factor: life.

As a descriptive term, “culture of death” highlights neither the pro-choice movement’s supreme end (highest objective) or highest authority, which is not death, but autonomy. The goal of pro-choice advocates is not to murder as many babies as possible. Their desire is not to see more death in the world, nor do they consider causing death as a highest good. For them the issue is not about death at all, but autonomy. Their supreme end is the defense of the principle that no one should prevent another person from doing what they want to do. “Culture of Self” accurately identifies the highest objective (autonomy) and the highest authority (self).

Consider the response to the Arkansas law: pro-choice voices are outraged that anyone would seek “to usurp private medical decisions that a woman needs to make with her family and her doctor.” But in the case of this particular law, what really has the doctor or family to do with the decision? Because of the law’s narrow focus, it only applies when the mother’s health is not at risk, the child’s health is not at risk, and the child is confirmed to be a living person on the basis of its beating heart. In this narrow case, there is no medical reason to terminate the pregnancy because there is no imminent health risk. Likewise, there is no scientific justification for termination, as a functioning human heart seems like a very low (reasonable) standard for personhood. There is no legal reason, as the pregnancy was the result of a conscious choice to engage in sexual intercourse, not rape or incest. All that’s left is the personal desire of an impregnated person.

Personal autonomy – the ability to make decisions for yourself – is a reasonable factor to weigh in any situation. The issue is not whether it can be considered, but rather how much weight it should be given. Where should “wants” be placed in the hierarchy of considerations? In the “culture of self,” nothing is higher – not even life. That may sound harsh, but when a law seeking to prevent only personal-preference abortions is labeled as “extreme,” I think the assessment is defensible.

In the hierarchy of factors, Biblical Christianity places personal preference far lower than do those in the pro-choice movement. Scripture, our only perfect rule for faith and practice, is the highest authority. Its “Ten Commandments” provide a useful framework for identifying the most important factors when making choices: devotion to God; the honor of God’s name and his pattern of work and rest; obedience to parents and authorities; respect for life, the marriage relationship, and personal property; contentment; truth. Notice that “honor of self” is conspicuously absent from that list. It’s not that our wants and desires are immaterial, it’s that these things are greater considerations. When these higher duties are honored, we can certainly do what we want in a given situation.

In many cases this means I will be able to do exactly, or close to, what I want to do. In many other cases this will mean laying down my wants for the sake of something greater. Caring for an aging parent and dealing with all of the heartache and complexities is much, much more difficult and unpleasant than some of the alternatives. But which option prioritizes the right things? Raising a child is one of the most sacrificial and difficult things a person can ever do. Carrying a child to full term for the sake of the child and its adoptive parents is likewise difficult, but in very different ways. Abortion is a much easier and more convenient answer to the challenge of an unintended pregnancy. But which option prioritizes the right things? For the “culture of life,” there can be no doubt.