Introduction

In 2022 in the state of Texas, Diana Rios at 20 weeks and 3 days pregnant learned that her water had broken early. Due to the abortion laws that were put under Texas Law, Diana couldn’t go through with an abortion even though there was “no longer a fetal heartbeat”. Instead, she and her husband flew to New Mexico and gave birth to her dead child. She had “to endure in the most traumatic way possible the loss of her baby and hope and motherhood” (Lee). When it comes to abortion laws, there are many views and opinions on what is right versus wrong. From the St. Paul Center for Biblical Theology, Clem Herald talks about abortion viewpoints in his Youtube video, “5 Lies of the Abortion Industry”. When watching, we find several debated discussions that involve abortion, and whether it should be justified or not.

1. “Abortion [is not] Necessary” (0:15)

Within the first two minutes of the video, Clem Herald starts with “Lie #5, abortion is a neccessary evil” [sic] (Herald 0:15). He then follows his introduction with Bill Clinton’s presidential campaign from 1992, where he addresses that “abortion[s] should be safe, it should be legal, and it should be rare” (Herald 0:28). Bill Clinton did indeed make this his presidential campaign, but what Clem doesn’t express is the full effect it had on the public. Instead, Clem then puts his own belief into the conversation by saying, “It seems to me that when we talk about abortion being a necessary evil, we’re falling into the same kind of mindset which perpetuated systems like slavery and systems like segregation” (Herald 0:52). Though he could have a point in this statement, it adds bias to his conclusion on what’s factual, and what is not.

Fig. 1. Clem Herald’s introduction to lie #5 (0:15).

When being introduced to Clem Herald’s claim, we’re already faced with unreliability within his presentation. We see this in Figure 1 where he misspelled “necessary” by adding an extra “c”. Not long after this grammatical error, Clem discusses Bill Clinton’s abortion campaign of “safe, legal, and rare” (“The Brilliance of ‘Safe, Legal, and Rare’”). Although he informs us that after about 49 years of his campaign, it did not show much success, he forgets to add the campaign’s impact during his presidency. Caitlin Flanagan, a reporter for The Atlantic, states that “those five syllables […] translated into a language the inchoate sentiments of millions of Americans so exactly that they had to hear it only once for it to become their firmly held position on abortion” (Flanagan). Meaning, that these three words increased the importance of abortion laws, rather than diminished them. Not only did this occur, but the amount of Clem’s own belief which he adds to the discussion brings bias into the topic at hand. Which creates a fault in the “factual” video.

2. “They [Are] People” (2:09)

While Clem presents “Lie #4, the pre-born baby is not a person” (2:09), he goes somewhat into depth about what is said in the Hebrew Bible, and how it is “ clear about the value and the dignity of every human being” (2:13). After elaborating the exact words said in the bible, he relates it with the “double standard of the pro-abortionist approach” (2:56), as well as providing an overly-detailed example of the image he’s trying to issue. He further explains how the unborn child not being a person “is a dangerous dangerous lie” (4:16), stating that ”if you study history, you realize that any society which starts to predicate the value of the weak on the wants and desires of the strong is a society destined to continue to oppose the weak and continue on this evil path” (4:19). 

While trying to support his claim, Clem quotes the Hebrew Bible, which is a bold choice due to the different cultures and beliefs that remain around the world. Therefore, going to the bible as a credible source may be a smart course of action in some cases, but it also adds to the number of debated differences within his video. In other words, would you believe a guy who talks about a faith that isn’t yours? Or would you focus on where your values and beliefs lie? Other than this debatable area of reliability, he does however mention something worthwhile when talking about the double standards of pro-abortionists, except this “double standard” could be placed on both sides of the argument, which he fails to mention. 

The major fault in this section is the last bit where he goes off into explaining how the “society was destined to continue to oppose the weak and continue on this evil path” (4:29). This does have insight into our society and how it justifies certain standards. Still, Clem brings in no true evidence on why the unborn child is a person. Whereas if he were to give evidence from the Supreme Court, adding how it set up “laws that establish[ed] fetal personhood—meaning they extend[ed] the legal rights of people to a fetus or embryo before viability” (“Fetal Personhood Laws”), it would’ve been a more political, and factual view. 

We should also bring medical science into perspective as to what is considered “living”. Marcelo Gleiser, a Brazilian physicist, talks about the different stages within pregnancy and informs that “[b]y five weeks there is a neural tube, and the beginnings of other organisms” (“When Does Life Begin?”) within the embryo. Marcelo adds to this by asking “Is it here that human life begins?” (“When Does Life Begin?”). Then adds other details of when the “heartbeat can be detected [during a] vaginal ultrasound [which is] somewhere between 6 ½ – 7 weeks” (“When Does Life Begin?”). Marcelo looks more into biology, rather than focusing on pure belief. After all, this debate “depends on [the] different interpretations of what life means at different stages of development” (“When Does Life Begin?”), which is what we must keep in mind when interpreting whether the unborn child is, or is not, considered a human life. 

3. “Men Can’t Have An Opinion” (4:41)

In the opening of “lie #3, men shouldn’t have an opinion” (4:41), Clem gets right into the impression that “it is selfish men who dominate our present society who have been at the root cause of many of our societal problems, [as well as the] root cause of the abortion industry” (4:50). Shortly after, he follows this by saying abortion “allows [men] to have relationships without commitment and sex without consequences” (5:10), as if trying to find additional injustices within not only our society but our congress. After introducing the audience to “the weak men who dominate our society” (5:35), he finds an opening to explain why “we need a generation of strong men who are willing to step forward, and stand up for their [loved ones] […] and say […] ‘enough is enough, we embrace responsibility, we embrace our calling to be protectors, to self-sacrifice, to give of ourselves, and to forgo of our own desires for the good of [our beloved, and society]’” (5:39). Referring back to the “lie” that men can’t have an opinion on abortions brings Clem back to his final note, saying “that it’s a lie which relies on and perpetuates the system of weak men who don’t get involved and allow this evil to endure” (6:11).  

When Clem discusses this topic, he tells us that he “[understands] the force of [the] lie and [believes that] there’s actually a certain truth that it’s getting at” (4:44), but he quickly goes into defining a difference between strong and weak men. An article from Newsweek has a similar discussion, stating that it’s “important that we recognize other men in the abortion conversation” (“A Point of Agreement in the Abortion Debate”), highlighting specific reasons why men should have a voice in this dispute; “Men whose opportunity to take responsibility for their children was ended by abortion and men whose support for an abortion left them dealing with regret, shame, and other lasting effects” (“A Point of Agreement in the Abortion Debate”). Where this information adds to Clem’s belief, it also gives reasoning as to why men should have a voice in the abortion discussion. It doesn’t give to either old or new congress. This article simply lays out information on the men’s point of view. 

Where some people might still disagree with this, saying that “women face [greater] burdens when it comes to carrying and bearing children” (“A Point of Agreement in the Abortion Debate”), we still need to see the father’s perspective and justify which action to take. Women may deal with the pregnancy, but there are still two parents at the end of the day. 

4. Women [Don’t] Need Abortion (6:20)

“Lie #2, woman need abortion[s]” (6:20) is quickly debated upon once introduced, having “the core of this lie [being the] fear of womanhood” (6:22). This heading is only discussed for about a minute and twenty seconds, and for that short period, Clem talks about women in society seeing pregnancy as a “menace [and] inconvenience” (6:57). He further adds to that by saying “younger woman are taught from a very young age that the very thing that makes them is the thing most likely to hold them back in life“ (6:59). Ending this segment of the video, he concludes that “woman do not need abortion, we would be much better without [it]” (7:34). 

Where Clem Herald infers that women are better off without abortions, human rights organizations argued that abortion restrictions can increase the number of fatalities with pregnant people; “The rate of unsafe abortions is nearly 45 times higher in countries with highly restrictive abortion laws than in countries where abortion is legal and unrestricted” (“Access to Abortion is a Human Right”). These groups further justify their claim by talking about “the World Health Organization (WHO) [who found that] complications from pregnancy and childbirth[s] are the leading cause of death for girls and young women ages 15 to 19” (“Access to Abortion is a Human Right”).

The new information gathered further proves the necessary need for abortion. Clem Herald may believe that pregnancies are “feared” by women, but when looking at statistics that WHO had provided, we see more reasoning for why there is a fight for these laws. If this didn’t influence your understanding, then look at what the UN Human Rights Committee (HRC) has to say about abortion and pregnant women today; “It has explicitly clarified that states parties cannot regulate access to abortion in any way that requires pregnant people to resort to unsafe abortions, and that states must provide safe, legal, and effective access to abortion to prevent risk to the lives and health of pregnant people, and to ensure that they are not subject to substantial pain or suffering, most notable in cases where pregnancy is the result of rape or incest, or the pregnancy is not viable” (“Access to Abortion is a Human Right”). We must consider all the possible things that could happen to people. Whether it has to do with sudden death, rape, abuse, etc., it can harshly affect how they go about things and how they live their lives after. Taking away a safe abortion option causes women to go out and find risky alternatives. So what’s better: Abortion or two lives lost rather than one?

5. “God Is […] In Control” (7:40)

When “lie #1, god is not in control” (7:40) is introduced by Clem, he accepts that “when it comes to the abortion debate, we’re supposed to keep god out of the picture” (7:41). Instead of leaving it at that, he goes on about how “87 percent of Americans believe in god, and when you look at other social changes in this country’s history, […] the champions of those changes were always believers in the Christian god” (7:47). He then quotes Dr. Martin Luther King, which we see in Figure 2, and uses this as a way of ending the discussion. As Clem’s video comes to an end, he closes the controversy with his viewpoints of his hope for our country and abortion rights; “I hope and pray that justice is coming for America, that in the spirit of Martin Luther King, this country will come to the recognition that for the sake of its woman, […] children, [and] men as well, every human being deserves the full protection of the law“ (8:42).

Fig. 2. Quote by Dr. Martin Luther King (8:31).

As Clem had said at the beginning of this section, God should not be brought up when discussing abortion, however, it most commonly is since it’s widely used as a source of reference. What Clem had failed to mention about religion and abortion, is that “the Bible was written in a world in which abortion was practiced and viewed with nuance” (“What the Bible actually says about abortion may surprise you”). We can see this in Exodus 21, which “suggests that a pregnant woman’s life is more valuable than the fetus’s” (“What the Bible actually says about abortion may surprise you”). So you see, the Bible doesn’t just say that abortion is not advised, but in truth, it gives permission depending on the situation at hand. 

Melanie Howard, a Professor of Biblical Theological Studies,  says that “Christians on both sides of the partisan divide have appealed to any number of texts to assert that their particular brand of politics is biblically blocked” (Howard). By saying this, she is simply stating that people are tightly tied into their beliefs, and choose to only recognize other ideals that fit with their faith. Along with that, Melanie adds that “if they claim the Bible specifically condemns or approves of abortion, they are skewing the textual evidence to fit their position” (Howard), which continues to add more to the point she was trying to make previously. Clem Herald failed to extend in the biblical sense what God had to do with abortion rights, and in a sense, creates a fault with his claims. If Clem had introduced the “[importance to recognizing] that although the Bible was written at a time when abortion was practiced, it never directly addresse[d] the issue” (“What the Bible actually says about abortion may surprise you”), then he would’ve had a stronger build to his conclusion.

Conclusion

When discussing an important topic that dates back to the 1900’s, it’s important to understand the facts. Abortion laws have been a topic of conversation since before Bill Clinton’s 1992 presidential campaign and are still widely debated today. There may never be an agreement on what’s right versus wrong when it comes to abortion laws, but understanding all the viewpoints is essential. Think about it from Diana Rios’s shoes, she wanted her child, but due to pregnancy difficulties, the baby had passed, and she was forced to give birth to her dead child. Would you want to go through this kind of situation? Losing not only your child but chances of mother- or father-hood? Or imagine your teenager had been raped, would you want your daughter to have an unknown man’s child? These are the things that must be kept in mind when referring to whether or not Abortion Laws are adequately in place.