To Pro-life & Pro 2nd Amendment Supporters All Lives Matter

By Dr. Eric M. Wallace

[Editor's note: this article was written shortly after the Sandy Hook shooting. However, in light of the Supreme Court's deliberation on abortion and recent mass shootings, it made sense to republish this article.]

One day on social media, I came across this question: Why do conservatives believe that outlawing guns won't prevent gun violence but that banning abortion prevents abortion?

Considering recent tragic shooting deaths of police officers and civilians and the dismemberment and selling of innocent human body parts, it occurs to me how apropos this question is—but probably not in a way you might think.

Ironically, the very essence of this question misses the overarching premise of conservatism: that all life is sacred and should be protected. For example, those of us with a biblical foundation believe that God is the author of human life, regardless of race, ethnicity, or color; and we are created in His image (Genesis 1:26-31). Phenomenally, the stamp of God is on the entire human race (Luke 20:25).  In other words, all lives matter, born or unborn.

Conservatives understand, with regards to guns, that no matter how many laws are passed, you will never be able to control the acquisition of firearms. Criminals are evil because they don’t follow the law. They are by definition “lawbreakers.” Hence, the only ones who obey these laws are innocent, law-abiding citizens. This raises the point that in a confrontation with a law-breaking criminal (or deranged assailant), the law abider is left at a disadvantage. As I have heard others say, “When you disarm the innocent, you empower the criminal to kill or abuse those you have disarmed.”

Of course, I’m not saying there shouldn’t be any gun laws. There absolutely should. But laws by themselves do not regulate behavior. Illegal drugs are a prime example and are believed to be one of the very reasons our borders and inner cities have turned into “war zones.” Disarming citizens only makes them easy victims. Women should understand this more than men. A woman trained to use a handgun and carries one is less likely to become a victim of a violent crime. It doesn’t matter how big the assailant is; a gun changes the whole dynamic. She can protect herself from an assailant, whether they are a 300 lbs attacker brandishing a knife or a gun. In this scenario, the question then becomes how proficient she is in handling the gun.

Inevitably, gun ownership brings down gun violence just because of self-preservation. Criminals undoubtedly prey on the weak and count on walking away from these encounters to enjoy their spoils. If they’re not sure whether you are armed or not, or better yet, confident that you are, there is less chance they will be willing to target you for an attack. A gun is neither good nor evil. It can be used to protect life without firing a shot or firing an attempt to prevent the a-would-be massacre.

The right to own and carry a weapon is in accord with our beliefs that all life is sacred and must be protected against those who have a total disregard for the sanctity of all human lives. It is also a constitutional right (2nd Amendment), allowing citizens to protect themselves from a dictatorial government. It is just another reason why conservatives are willing to stand to defend our right to own guns.

How many children could have been saved had one or more teachers been armed at Sandy Hook elementary school? Or, what if signs were warning would-be assailants that teachers may be armed? God only knows if these massacres ever happen or if it is stopped after the first few shots as vigilant armed teachers are equipped to respond with returned fire.

I doubt the Israelis are having this kind of conversation.

Unfortunately, for the unborn, we can’t arm them so that they can protect themselves. Abortion is always carried out against the life of the innocent, except for the mother's life. Societal ethics should provide the first line of defense for the helpless unborn babies, then the father, and lastly, the mother. Although shootings in public schools and theaters are heart-wrenching and horrible to imagine, countless innocent lives are being taken every day by abortions. Even more horrific are the recent Planned Parenthood videos of employees discussing harvesting baby body parts for profit.

According to statistics, over 3,000 babies are aborted every day. In other words, 3,000 babies were killed by legal homicide. If the massacre in Newtown, CT, was horrific, and it was, then what of the killings of these innocent lives? How can we seemingly turn away from the death of the unborn while simultaneously declaring outrage for the deaths of the precious children in Newtown? Or the killing of young Black men who put themselves in harms way by their actions?

To social conservatives, the only way to reduce the number of abortions and the death of the innocent is to outlaw abortion. Again, the law itself will not stop all abortions, but it will serve as a measure to encourage law-abiding citizens from illegally trying to obtain one. It will also reflect our morals and values as a people without contradiction.  We incite moral evil in the hearts of men when what we deem “legal” is in opposition to what we know to be moral. Our laws should protect the innocent, both the born and unborn. The right to bear arms protects those who are born. The right to life and pro-life laws save the unborn's lives—no contradiction.

Laws are meant to restrict or regulate behavior. We outlaw rape, murder, and theft but do these laws stop this behavior? No, but laws (and the punishment associated with breaking such laws) will certainly curtail participation in these crimes for many.

Anti-abortion laws say to conflicted would-be parents that what they are contemplating is morally wrong. It also mandates physicians and clinicians that the destruction of life in the womb has moral and legal consequences. Arming innocent citizens says you may be biting off more than you can chew to would-be criminals. Beware. In either instance, life is more likely to be preserved if we make the consequences intentionally unappealing.

Now, I have a question for those who still advocate for abortions and stronger gun laws restricting the right to protect one’s life, home, family, and property. Jesus once challenged the Pharisees and teachers of the law as He prepared to heal a man on the Sabbath. Jesus asked, “Which is lawful on the Sabbath: to do good or evil, to save life or to destroy it?” And so, I ask a similar question, “which makes for better policy: to outlaw good or evil, to protect life or to destroy it?” (Mark 3:4; Luke 6:9). God help us if we continue to get this question wrong.

[Dr. Eric Wallace is an African American scholar and the co-founder of Freedom’s Journal Institute (FJI), an Illinois-based nonprofit organization addressing contemporary social, political, and religious issues on behalf of African Americans. FJI’s mission is to "advance the Kingdom of God through sociopolitical education and engagement rooted in a Biblical Worldview." FJI vigorously challenges liberal ideology with conservative principles, essential to promote and sustain thriving families. He is also the host of FJI's flagship television program "Kingdoms in Konflict: A Matter of Faith, Race, and Public Policy" found on the NRBtv Network and other media platforms.]