Matty B. Duran

Joined July 2009

I am a servant of The Lord Jesus Christ. He is my Saviour and Lord. I am also a Christian mother who loves The Lord Jesus Christ. My...


D. James Kennedy
A.B., M.Div., M.Th., D.D., D.Sac.Lit., Ph.D.,
Litt.D., D.Sac.Theol., D.Humane Let.

“Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the
womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations”
—Jeremiah 1:5

Abortion—the myths and the realities. I would like very much to discuss with you what is probably the most important single moral issue of our time—the matter of abortion. It has been called by numerous writers “The American Holocaust.” This topic deals with a matter of vast importance; it deals with the matter of life and death.

The Declaration of Independence says, “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.”

More important than liberty, more important than the pursuit of happiness, more important than economics, and more important even than religious freedom, is the question of life itself. If we are deprived of life, obviously all of our other rights are gone as well.

Since the famous Roe v. Wade decision in 1973, sixteen million unborn babies have been killed. (This figure was recorded in 1984. To date, 2013, 56 million have been murdered) That number is greater than those lost in all of the wars that have been fought in the history of America.

This is a problem of tremendous dimensions. What kind of problem is it? Is it a political
problem? It obviously has a political aspect to it, but it is basically a moral problem, an ethical problem, a spiritual problem, and a social problem. There are over a hundred texts in the Bible dealing with the unborn. The Bible has much to say on the subject, but all too often we have been silent, even as many were silent in Germany when the great atrocities were taking place there.
(Page 1 of 9 Copyright © Coral Ridge Ministries Media, Inc. All Rights Reserved.)

Who are the people involved in this issue? There are some who say it is merely a woman’s concern. I have great sympathy and empathy for a woman, especially a woman who, out of wedlock, finds herself carrying an illegitimate child. Like others, I feel empathy toward her and am concerned for her plight, so much so that our church has started a home where such women can be cared for, and where we are able to provide a positive, viable alternative to the matter of abortion.

However, this is not merely a woman’s issue; there are others concerned as well, including, for example, the husband. That newly created life is as much the husband’s as it is the wife’s. Historically, it is interesting to note that when the Roman Empire did away with laws that allowed abortion, it was done not because of the woman or the harm that abortions were doing to women (and indeed they do vastly more harm than most people are aware of), but because the husband was being defrauded of his progeny.

There are others involved as well. For example, grandparents. As the father of a marriageable-age daughter I want you to know that I would have an interest in her children, as does every grandfather and grandmother who love their grandchildren. It is also true of siblings. How many people have complained because they never had brothers or sisters with whom to grow up.

Even society has an interest in the death of millions of its future citizens. I remember reading the story about the birth of a baby where the circumstances were so tragic, the poverty so great, the handicaps so numerous that by a half dozen different measuring tools used today this baby would, no doubt, have been aborted. But it wasn’t. The baby’s name was Ludwig van Beethoven. Most of all, there is the matter of the child itself. The Bible speaks very strongly about “hands that shed innocent blood” (Proverbs 6:17) and God’s great displeasure with the shedding of innocent blood.
There is also God Himself. These unborn creatures are made in His image and He is greatly concerned about them. So we see there are many people involved in this issue.

We are told that legalized abortions are much safer than illegal abortions. That, I might say, is contested by people who know the facts. Before the legalization of abortion, the so-called ten-thousand-deaths figure was thrown around before numerous committees in Congress and elsewhere.

Where did that figure come from? Dr. Bernard Nathanson, who headed up the movement to legalize abortion and had performed thousands of abortions, has now recanted and repented. He grieves over the thousands of deaths he created. When asked where that figure came from, he said, “We made it up. We thought it would impress the committees.” So, if those who favor abortion don’t care enough, and if they don’t have the morals to keep them from destroying thousands of innocent children, then telling a convenient lie is not going to be such a problem, is it?
(Page 2 of 9 Copyright © Coral Ridge Ministries Media, Inc. All Rights Reserved.)

In 1967 there were 275 deaths in this country as a result of abortion. That was when only a few states had legalized them. Interestingly, 164 of those deaths were from legal abortions; that was more than the deaths from illegal abortions at that time.
It is a complex problem. The Bible says, “Come now, and let us reason together” (Isaiah 1:18). Doing away with emotion and hysterics, let us reason together and consider some of the reasons given for abortion and consider them rationally.

First of all, we are told that abortion is not killing sixteen million children; that these are not living human beings—these are simply fetal material, “genetic garbage” (another term that has been used).

Recently I read where sixty prominent physicians had met in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and presented a declaration stating that the biological facts are absolutely conclusive that the fetus is a living human being. These doctors included Drs. Hofmeister and Schmidt, past presidents of the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology. Also included were Dr. Joseph Faley, past present of the American Academy of Neurology; Dr. Nathanson, the largest committer of abortions in America, and many other prominent physicians. They said this:
The developing fetus is not a sub-human species with a different genetic composition. As clearly demonstrated by in vitro (dish) fertilization, so also in in vivo (womb), the embryo is alive, human, and unique in the special environmental support required for that stage of human development.

That is, the fetus is a genetically unique human being. It is medically incontrovertible. Every doctor knows this. Every scientist knows, too, that from the moment of conception this is a very unique, genetically different human being.

I remember listening to a doctor point out that he had talked to dozens of doctors around the country who had performed abortions, and he asked them if they knew that what they were destroying was a human life. Their responses were very interesting. Every one of them became angry. Why were they angry? Because they were destroying human life? No. Because his question implied the possibility that they may have been so ignorant that they didn’t know they were destroying human life? Of course, they knew. They said they were doing it for a “good reason”!
Every doctor knows what that is in the womb. They have known it for centuries. Many women have been deceived by the linguistic gymnastics used to hide what they are doing. The Hippocratic Oath, which has been used in Western civilization by doctors for well over two thousand years, makes it very clear that the doctor will give no abortive remedy. It is interesting that now we are returning to a pre-Hippocratic period. In fact, there are some medical schools that no longer use the Hippocratic Oath for that reason.

We are told that women have the right to choose. That is a very interesting concept. It is an aborted sentence—the right to choose. It ends rational discussion; it is an emotional
(Page 3 of 9 Copyright © Coral Ridge Ministries Media, Inc. All Rights Reserved.)
declaration—a sentence without a predicate. Obviously, a moment’s reflection would indicate that a person does not have an unlimited right to choose anything he wants to do. The very essence of civilization is based upon the limitation of the people’s right to choose.

Do I have a right to choose? I am sure that if I went to a meeting of NOW (National Organization of Women) and asked that, there would be a resounding response of “Yes! We all have the right to choose.” Wonderful! I choose to kill you! Do I still have the right to choose? That puts a little different coloring to the question, doesn’t it? The ironic thing is that there really is no informed choice given to those who insist on the “right to choose.”

A young man who heads an organization that had been picketing various abortion chambers, talked to the owner of one of these places. He said to him, “If you will just give me a little desk in the corner of your establishment where I can have a few minutes with each of these ladies to explain what the alternative is to abortion and exactly what takes place in abortion, and what is in her womb, we will immediately stop picketing.”

The owner’s response, “Never! Forget it.” The only choice women are given is whether they want the abortion on Tuesday or Saturday. After all, it is only the “product of conception”!

In talking to numerous women who have had abortions, they told me that never once were they told that what was inside of them was a baby. It is called everything but that. The abortionists use the term, “fetus.” Why do they use that term? Do you know what a fetus is? Do you know what fetus means? Fetus is a perfectly good Latin word which simply means “an unborn baby.”

Martin Luther knew how important it was that the Latin Scriptures be translated into the vernacular so that people would know what was going on. The abortionists know how important it is to translate the English words into Latin so that young women won’t know what is going on!

We are told that the fetus is not a person. As they back away semantically, they say that it may be a living human being, but that it does not have personhood. That certainly dredges up some very interesting historical reminiscences. For example, it reminds me of 1857 and the Dred Scott Case, where the decision by the Supreme Court indicated that the black man, the slave, was not a person.

It reminds me of Nazi Germany, where the Nazis maintained that the Jew was not a person. These people knew that before they could enslave or exterminate human beings, the first thing they had to do was to depersonalize them; dehumanize them. They had to be semantically destroyed before they could be physically destroyed. They had to be made into something less than human. That is exactly what the Nazis did then and that is what is being done today.
(Page 4 of 9 Copyright © Coral Ridge Ministries Media, Inc. All Rights Reserved.)

It is interesting that the same depersonalizing arguments used to support abortion were used to support infanticide in the Baby Doe case—“not a person.” They are the same arguments used to support the destruction of the mentally deficient, or defective babies—“not fully persons.”

We should never forget that before Adolf Hitler ever killed a single Jew, he murdered 275,000 handicapped people. First, abortion had been prevalent in Germany for over twenty years; then there was infanticide—the killing of babies. Then there was the destruction of the 275,000 adult handicapped people.

Abortion has been prevalent in Japan for decades. Consider what has happened there. There was a strong push for euthanasia, a strong push to get rid of the elderly and the defective. Why? Through abortion, the younger generation was destroyed, and now there are so many older people to support that it is becoming economically infeasible; the economic pressures are rising to get rid of the old people. There is a certain poetic justice there. The parents have been killing the children, and now the children are rising up and killing the parents! God will not be mocked!

“Not a person,” indeed! There are over one hundred biblical texts that make it very clear who they are. Listen to the personal pronouns
• “Thou hast clothed me with skin and flesh.” Clothed what? It? “Me, with skin and flesh. And hast fenced me with bones and sinews” (Job 10:11).
• “Thus saith the LORD that made thee, and formed thee from the womb, which will help thee” (Isaiah 44:2).
• “Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me” (Psalm 51:5).
• In Jeremiah we read: “Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified [consecrated] thee” (Jeremiah 1:5). Consecrated you! We don’t consecrate an appendix or a tumor—but a person.
• “When Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb” (Luke 1:41).
Elisabeth said that the babe in her womb leaped for joy. It is interesting that you never hear a woman say that the “fetus” inside her leaped for joy. It is always the “babe.” The Greek word is brephos; the babe in the womb is the brephos. It is the same term used to describe Jesus: the babe lying in a manger, clothed in swaddling clothes. That is a baby, not a tumor.

Then we are told that babies should be aborted because they are not wanted. This, indeed, brings up a very new and interesting perspective on the unalienable right of life. It now depends upon some popularity contest! If one is not wanted, then one surely should not be allowed to be born! It is an interesting philosophical and logical twist of things. Of course, we would all agree
(Page 5 of 9 Copyright © Coral Ridge Ministries Media, Inc. All Rights Reserved.)

that it is nice to be wanted. Everybody should be wanted. Certainly, every wife has the right to be wanted by her husband. We would all agree with that.
If some young lady should come into my office and tell me that she is not wanted by her husband and her heart is broken, I would say to her, “My dear, I think that is the saddest thing I have ever heard. It breaks my heart to hear that your husband, that mean old wretch, doesn’t want a lovely thing like you. There is only one thing to do.” I open my desk drawer, pull out a gun, and BANG, she is dead! That solves the problem! “Bring in the next counselee . . .” That is so ludicrous, so absurd, and so illogical as to be virtually irrational, except that there are millions of people going around saying “not wanted.”

In the case of a baby, it is not only irrational; it is also a lie. There are one and a half million abortions performed every year in this country. There are two million couples looking unsuccessfully for babies to adopt. Many adoption agencies have had to close because of a lack of babies. They are all in the incinerator! Couples have had to wait five to ten years to adopt a baby. On the black market today, babies are selling for as much as $35,000! I want to tell you that nobody spends $35,000 for something they don’t want very, very much. Babies are wanted!

We are also told that because children are not wanted, they will be abused. They won’t be abused if they are adopted by people who want them. Of course, again a lie is involved, for we are told that the basic reason for child abuse is that children are not wanted, and yet studies have shown that the vast majority of abused children were wanted. Since sixteen million “unwanted children” have been destroyed, child abuse should have virtually disappeared from America, but it is epidemic in our time. No, it does not follow that because children are not wanted, they will be abused.

Why do we have so much child abuse today? It is because we have devalued human beings—children in particular. We have destroyed them by the millions in the womb; we are now moving toward destroying them after they are born.
A young college-age girl came to a counselor and told the story of years of child abuse in her home. She said the thing that hurt her most of all was when her mother said to her, after beating her, “And you just remember that we didn’t need to have you at all.” Have we sunk so low that the day has come when children will have to get up in the morning and thank their parents for not having killed them? What a distortion of everything decent and moral that is!

Then we are told that a woman has a right over her own body. That is supposed to be so self-evident as to immediately end the discussion. So, what shall we say about that? My response would be that of course, a woman has a right over her own body; who would dispute such a fact? But, we should also point out that the law limits the right. A woman does not have the right to commit suicide. That happens to be against the law. It is only within reason that she has a right over her own body. The statement is true, but it is totally irrelevant, because that baby within her does not happen to be a part of her body!
(Page 6 of 9 Copyright © Coral Ridge Ministries Media, Inc. All Rights Reserved.)

The same sixty prominent physicians referred to previously, including two past presidents of the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology, said this also: “A human ovum fertilized by human sperm produces a biologically identifiable human embryo.” It has separate and unique genetic information and biological material. Every cell in a woman’s body has exactly the same forty-six chromosomes and identical thousands of genes in those chromosomes. Every single cell is identical in that way, except for the cells in that baby. They all have different sets of chromosomes and different sets of genes.

The baby even provides its own nest. Many people do not realize that the baby is the one that creates the placenta. It is the baby that produces the umbilical cord. The baby has its own blood stream. It has a different blood type. It produces its own blood. In half of the cases, the baby has a different sex. If it is part of the woman’s body, then the woman is part male—in some cases.
It is also interesting to see the developments in fetology. The science of the study of the baby (which coincidentally began in the same year of 1973)—are producing some amazing revelations. For example: In vitro is the development of the egg and sperm in a dish outside the mother. This has been going on now for some time and scientists are finding that they can keep that newly created life alive longer and longer before implanting it in a womb.

At the same time, they are able to cause the baby who is born prematurely to survive at an ever-younger age. The fact that they can keep the embryo alive longer in vitro and at the same time cause the premature to survive at an earlier and earlier age, causes scientists to speculate that before the end of this century those two figures are going to meet. That is to say that scientifically, a baby could be conceived, fertilized, and grow to maturity without ever having been inside of the womb of a woman! I personally don’t know that that is so desirable. Nevertheless, it is scientifically true.

The argument is made that an embryo is part of the body of the mother because it is not viable outside the womb. Suppose in a few years that there are babies who have been fertilized, conceived, and grow up never having seen the inside of the mother’s womb. Is a woman going to say, “Oh, that is just a part of my body?” It will be self-evident that this is a separate, unique, genetic individual, totally apart from her body.

Let me point out to you that when that baby is six weeks old, it is totally dependent upon the woman for nutrition and protection. Because it is not viable apart from the care of the mother and totally dependent upon her, obviously at six weeks after birth, the mother has the right to kill it then, too, because it can’t survive without her! What about six months of age? How about a year old baby? Can it take care of itself? Kill them also!

How about a sailor in a submarine submerged for six months. All of the air that he breathes is dependent upon that submarine. The food he eats, the protection from the pressures and the water of the sea all are dependent upon the submarine. Obviously, any intelligent person should be able to see that the sailor is simply a part of the submarine! Well, logic is logic, isn’t it? (Page 7 of 9 Copyright © Coral Ridge Ministries Media, Inc. All Rights Reserved.)

We are also told that abortions are performed to save the mother’s life. That is simply a smoke screen. Less than one percent of all abortions are performed to save the mother’s life. When delivering a child to save the mother’s life, the doctor is doing something altogether different than abortion. He is trying to save both the woman and the baby, if possible. That is quite different from having a baby aborted, and then if it survives the abortion procedure, allowing it to die with a sign over it saying, “Nothing by mouth.”

What about the matter of rape and incest? Again, less than two percent of all abortions are done because of rape and incest. Rape is a very violent and evil crime, but do we solve it by committing another violent act? Do we solve it by killing the innocent child, who is as much a victim of the rape as was the mother, and who had, in fact, nothing to do with it at all? Do two wrongs make a right? In the Bible, the child of rape was allowed to live and the rapist was put to death. Today, we find that the penalties against rape have become more and more lenient, whereas the child is now the subject of capital punishment. Justice has been totally destroyed and perverted in that the guilty are practically allowed to go free and the innocent are killed. The very antithesis of justice!

It is said that women will have abortions anyway—even if it is unlawful to do so. Is that true? Let us look at history. Rumania had free abortions for decades, to the extent that the population rate of growth had sunk so low that the whole economy and future of the nation were jeopardized, so in 1965 a law was passed which very strictly limited the number of abortions that could be performed. What happened? In the very next year, the birth rate doubled. This is to say that there are many women who will abide by the law, even though there are some who will not.

We are told by some of the radical feminists that the women will become hysterical, they will abort themselves with coat hanger.

Rosemary Bottcher, an analytical chemist whose major work deals with protecting the environment, says she doesn’t like the very unflattering picture of women that the radical feminist abortionists are setting forth. She doesn’t think women are that way at all. She says that if that is true, and if women cannot handle the stress and pressures of a pregnancy, how are they going to handle the stress and pressures of the presidency! She adds that she does not like the picture the feminists paint of women, who deplore the idea that the value of a woman is determined by whether or not some man wants her.

However, says the abortionist, the value of a child is determined by whether or not the mother wants it! They become irate at the idea that sexual freedom should allow men the right to rape women, and rightly so. They insist that their sexual freedom allows them the right to kill unborn children. They lament, she says, men’s reluctance to recognize their personhood, but they steadfastly refuse to recognize the personhood of the unborn. Indeed, I might add that they get most furious at pornographers and

Playboy advocates who see women as nothing but meat—flesh on display, at the same time they are insisting upon saying that the baby is nothing but flesh, tissue, a product of conception.
(Page 8 of 9 Copyright © Coral Ridge Ministries Media, Inc. All Rights Reserved.)

Rosemary says that men are expected to be mature when they conceive a child; they are expected to endure inconvenience and hardship, if necessary, to provide the means to bring a child up and put that child through college today, even if this requires taking an extra job or working late at night. He is expected to do this because he is supposedly mature.

But the woman, according to feminists, is painted as someone who is so selfish and so immature and so irrational and so hysterical that she cannot stand the fact of several months of inconvenience in order to bring life to another person or to bring happiness, perhaps, to some other family who might adopt that child. With Rosemary, I agree that that is, indeed, a denigration of the female sex in its entirety. I find that most of the women I know are rather altruistic; they are concerned about others; they give themselves for others. Indeed, the feminist portrayal of women is something less than flattering, to say the least.

My friends, the time has come for Christians to stand up, to become active, to fight this gross moral evil of our time. We have seen that there is not a rational argument that can be presented for this flood of abortions that launched this nation out in a sea of blood. God says, “Woe unto the land that sheddeth innocent blood.” We are, perhaps, going to bring down upon us the very wrath of God. I am certain this hideous blot on the escutcheon of mankind will be wiped away, just as slavery went the way of other evils, just as the Inquisition passed away, just as Nazism passed away. So, also, will this butchery of the innocent pass away. However, it will leave a scar on the historical character of our nation.

May God grant that because of our prayers, because of our concern, because of our actions, this evil will pass away soon before many other children are given over to the butchers who have no feeling about taking the life of the silent innocent. One of the signs of character and morality is the concern for the weak, the sick, and the helpless.

Even as the chivalrous knights were concerned about women, so should we be concerned about these members of our society who are the most helpless, the most silent sufferers in our time. God grant that soon this evil will pass from our land. May it be!

PRAYER: Father, we thank Thee even now that soon this evil shall be swept into one of the dark chapters of history, and the children shall be granted their rights as living human beings and persons, along with the slaves and the Jews of years gone by. Help us, we pray, to have the courage to face this controversial issue in our time and to have the compassion to help those who need help, to provide viable alternatives to those who are in deep trouble. We pray this in Christ’s name. Amen.

Sermon delivered by Dr. D. James Kennedy on October 28, 1984, at Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church in Fort Lauderdale, Florida.
(Page 9 of 9 Copyright © Coral Ridge Ministries Media, Inc. All Rights Reserved.)

Journal Comments

  • vigor