Update: It needs to be made clear that the intent of this post was never to critique or endorse the Green Party policy – though it should be clear that I disagree with sections of it. For that reason there are elements missing that would be present if I were engaging in a full critical analysis of the policy and an endorsement of the bits I agree with. What motivated most of my approach in this post, was a pastoral concern about how we conduct ourselves in disagreement. Understandably there will be both agreement and disagreement with my approach.

Disclaimer Update: In the interest of full disclosure since it has been pointed out that it is important for some, allow me to clarify that from 2011 to 2012 I was a member of the Green Party, having paid the small membership fee. I attended one meeting of my local branch. It was something I did in the lead up to the 2011 election as, at the time, I felt that the Green Party most reflected my position on many things. At the time they did not have a developed policy on the abortion issue. Once my party membership lapsed in 2012 I did not seek to renew it as I was being ordained to the ministry in late 2012 and I believe all Christian ministers have a responsibility to be as nonpartisan as possible. This was not a fact I sought to hide in this post, it just did not occur to me that it was needed information. Originally I was just writing for my usual blog audience, most of whom would be aware of this fact. But with the post going well beyond that, clearly this statement has become needed. As demonstrated by another blogger, the information is readily available on the internet and was even cleared up in the comments section of this post.

Before I begin, allow me to affirm that I am pro-life. My desire is to see the number of abortions in our country come down as I think the figure is tragically high. It is a tragedy for the life of the unborn child and the lives of both the mother and father in the situation. I am also acutely aware that with our statistics as they are, there are thousands and thousands of women in New Zealand who have had an abortion and men who have been a part of it, and they are not talking about it. Whoever you are reading this, we all need to seriously consider the implications of that. There is a high chance that there are women in our own sphere – our workplaces, our friendship circles, our online readers, our clubs, and our churches – who have gone through an abortion and we don’t know it. That fact alone should influence how we express ourselves on this very sensitive issue. They’re reading what we write on Facebook and they’re hearing the things we say out loud.

On Friday the Green Party became the only party in New Zealand to make abortion a party issue rather than a private conscience issue – in so doing it became the only party to put forward a party policy on it. The response over the last couple of days in the circles I am connected to has been angry as people have encountered the policy through the lens of prolife.org.nz.

Much of the response I have seen has been disgust, and unbridled anger. Alongside the passionate, but reasonable and robust disagreement with the policy from thoughtful pro-life supporters, I’ve also seen comments from people wishing violence upon the Green Party and specifically Russel Norman as he is the person who appears in the image prolife.org.nz have connected to their main article. Terms like murder, slaughter, child sacrifice, and likening the policy to the actions of the Nazis have been thrown around very quickly along with threats of violence towards Green Party members, all to be seen by those who have been through an abortion. This makes me truly sad.

Update: Please note that though such views have been expressed following the articles from Pro Life NZ, I do not hold them responsible for those expressions of violence.

Update: Since writing this article and because of the subsequent spreading of it that I did not anticipate, I have also encountered the extreme of the other side, and I have found it equally abhorrent. Seeing unborn babies referred to as ‘parasites’ or trying to explain that the baby is some sort of ‘torturer’ because of the changes it causes in the mother’s body are extremely damaging. Just as my pastoral concern for those who have been through abortions leads me to struggle with how this is discussed from the pro-life side, so it leads me to extreme concern about the rhetoric of the other side. Imagine how it might feel for a mother emotionally connected to the life lost to hear of that life referred to in such ways. If you have any concern for those mothers and fathers then that sort of approach is just not acceptable. I also struggle with the minimisation of worldviews underpinned by ‘religion’ in this discussion. This is a discussion fed by worldviews, to argue that one worldview has no place simply because you don’t agree is arrogant. Just as I do not hold Pro Life NZ responsible for the violent views expressed by some who support their position, I do not hold the Green Party responsible for the extreme rhetoric expressed in support of their position.

Because I think any discussion should take place with the facts in hand, here is the actual policy from the Green Party, to inform opinions:

Currently, abortion is a crime in New Zealand. It is only legal if two consultants agree that the pregnancy would seriously harm the woman’s mental or physical health or that the fetus would have a serious disability.

The Green Party recognises this situation as problematic, because:

• The time taken to see two consultants means abortions happen later in the pregnancy. This is more dangerous, and it makes it difficult to access medical abortions (those which are conducted using medicine rather than surgery), which can only be performed at under 9 weeks gestation.
• Rape (sexual violation) is not grounds for abortion under NZ law.
• The fact that 99% of abortions are approved on ‘mental health’ grounds reveals the dishonesty of the current legal situation.
• The current laws reinforce abortion stigma, and are discriminatory towards people with disabilities.
• Abortion’s continuing criminal status helps reinforce geographical variations in access to abortion services.

We trust women to make decisions that are best for them and their whānau/family. We want to ensure equal access to all potential options is available to pregnant women.

Decriminalisation will also reduce the stigma and judgement that is often the result of the reason a woman chooses to have an abortion (e.g. rape being seen as more justified grounds for abortion than poverty), and will enable abortions to be performed earlier in pregnancy, which is safer.

The Green Party supports the right to choose.

To prevent coercion either for or against abortion, the Green Party will:

• Ensure neutral counseling is available (but not mandatory).
• Discourage non-neutral counselling which provides women with biased, inaccurate health information.
• Ensure medical oversight agencies, such as the Medical Council, maintain, publicise and enforce codes of ethics mandating that personal beliefs (including religious, political and moral) are protected, however the practitioner is required to refer the patient to a neutral practitioner in a timely manner.

To support the freedom to have an abortion the Green Party will:

• Decriminalise abortion by removing it from the Crimes Act.
• Allow terminations after 20 weeks gestation only when the woman would otherwise face serious permanent injury to her health, or in the case of severe fetal abnormalities (as is current practice).
• Legislate to protect the right to have an abortion.
• Ensure that all options to terminate a pregnancy are equally available to every woman in NZ.
• Reconcile NZ law with Treaties to which we are signatory, including CEDAW (Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, and other Human Rights Treaties).

To protect the freedom to choose to continue a pregnancy, the Green Party will:

• Ensure that options are presented in an understandable manner, with support from independent advocates or translators where necessary.
• Ensure those who are competent to make informed decisions on their sexual and reproductive rights have the freedom to do so.
• Provide increased support to vulnerable pregnant women so they feel they can continue with their pregnancy if this is their preferred option.
• Ensure women are not penalised financially for choosing to keep their child (see Income Support policy).
• Address concerns about pressure for and overuse of antenatal screening, which should be an individual choice, and ensure that parents are fully informed about available and potential supports for families and people living with disabilities. [See our Disability policy].

That’s the policy. This bit is extremely significant “The fact that 99% of abortions are approved on ‘mental health’ grounds reveals the dishonesty of the current legal situation.” Everyone needs to understand that. We, though our legislation was not set up to allow it, are effectively a nation with abortion on demand and while you’re getting angry about the Green policy, take note that they’re simply being honest about it where every other party tacitly supports the status quo by turning a blind eye to how it is being used. Every other party, in effect, actually plays out what the Greens are proposing. So for those who are saying you can’t possibly support the Greens because of this, you need to realise all the other parties effectively support this by not changing how the current legislation is understood and practiced. The whole thing is a tragedy.

Update: While I consider parts of the Green Party policy to be a step in the wrong direction, my challenge here would be to not simply move your vote because ‘it’s not the Greens’. Too often we do that with our voting without truly considering the pros and cons of where we are moving our vote to. If you wish to move your vote because this issue is dear to you, take the opportunity to respectfully challenge the party you are moving your vote to and if they satisfy your position then vote for them.

There are two issues that have especially caused anger. They have been stated in public as the ability to abort disabled babies anytime up until birth, and, as Brendan Malone (cross-posted by Pro Life NZ) has put it:

They want to deny NZ medical professionals the long-standing right to freedom of conscience, and force them to participate in a procedure that is both ethically highly controversial and which is mostly carried out for social reasons in this country.

On the first, again, like it or not, illegal or not, this already happens in New Zealand. This is what the Green policy says on the matter “Allow terminations after 20 weeks gestation only when the woman would otherwise face serious permanent injury to her health, or in the case of severe fetal abnormalities (as is current practice).” That last bit is the trigger issue, but take a look at this document, particularly pages 32 and 37. You’ll see on page 32 that there were 171 ‘terminated pregnancies’ (abortions post 20 weeks) in 2011. On page 37, with the brown columns in the image, you can see the reasons for those terminations with a large portion of those being things that could be defined as ‘severe fetal abnormalities.’ Under strict readings of our current legislation that is illegal but it is, as the Green policy states, ‘current practice.’ Again, on many levels, this is a sad, sad tragedy. No political party is looking to do anything to restrict this, so though other parties may not be looking to decriminalise abortion, make access to it easier and enshrine it as a right, they all tacitly support exactly the same thing in practice. Also, keep in mind that all of those terminations are a tragedy that involved real people. Having been around couples who have struggled with the specter of fetal abnormalities late in their pregnancies I’ve seen how much of a struggle it is. In each case the parents have chosen to continue with the pregnancies but who am I to judge them as people if they had chosen not to, even though I strongly lean towards a choice for life?

On the second issue about forcing all to perform abortions even if they disagree with it, this is what the policy actually says:

Ensure medical oversight agencies, such as the Medical Council, maintain, publicise and enforce codes of ethics mandating that personal beliefs (including religious, political and moral) are protected, however the practitioner is required to refer the patient to a neutral practitioner in a timely manner.

Update: Please see the comment from ‘Not a Wild Hera’ for an expansion on why this bit of the policy is problematic for medical professionals who object to abortion.

It’s easy to feel anger at a policy such as this one put forward by the Greens, to verbally roast them at the stake within the confines of Facebook, and to all the while miss the wider picture. The Greens, like it or not, are being honest about much of the system as it truly is in practice (though there are elements of the policy that go a number of steps further than current practice, such as with medical professionals who object), while all other parties sheepishly push it to the side, hoping that this controversial hot potato won’t be thrown into the mix for fear that it might trigger something they can’t contain. Well, like it or not, the Greens have sparked a dialogue on the issue. Feel free to put your vote somewhere else, but if you’re doing it because of this issue then ask yourself if the place you’re taking your vote to is actually much better.

As my friend Brett has pointed out, where this is a big shift is in the decriminalisation of abortion that is not otherwise mandated by a legal exception. This removes the human rights of the unborn child that our current legislation upholds and is the biggest real change caused by the policy. For me this is the heart of the problem that I have with parts of the policy. Many of the issues people have, flow out of it. Abortion that fits within the legal exceptions is currently not a crime and this is what the system as it is now, is supposed to assess. Currently the unauthorised killing of an unborn child is rightly a crime. This should be debated as it’s about the tension between the rights of a women and the rights of the unborn child when the two clash and therefore the balance of the two (most views sway in favour of one or the other and the challenge is to hold them together), but we need to consider how we debate it.

Now that we’ve got the political part out of the way I’d like to think about how we conduct such discussions. While many have been very reasoned in their critique of the policy and many have understandably taken an opportunity to express a grieving sadness, it pained me that yet again there has been a loud Christian response online that was quick to veer into extreme and angry vitriol and judgement. While I disagree with much of the policy, people didn’t seem to notice that it offers the best support for those who choose to follow through on their pregnancy but may struggle with it (something I fully endorse, hence I highlighted it within the policy), that I’ve seen any party deliver (in my disagreement with elements of the proposed policy I would support a better enforcement of our current legislation with some adjustments that enable the gathering of data around the reasons for abortion so we can begin to tackle these no matter what our perspective on abortion, but with this part of the Green policy front and centre and the Church playing a key role in those support services). But most of all, in the moral crusade, those who have been through abortions have been relegated to poor stereotypes of fast, loose women, and sex crazed men with no sense of responsibility. My guess is that these stereotypes are a long way from the many very real humans who are making the choice to terminate their pregnancies and dealing with the consequences. Just as the unborn children are vulnerable, so are those women and men. They should also feature highly in our concern and should shape how we discuss these things.

If we truly want to tackle the high abortion statistics in our country then our attention needs to be drawn to the vulnerability factors that leave people feeling like they need to terminate the life of an unborn child, worldviews and stories of humanity that have cheapened our sexuality and degraded the individual and communal sense of identity, and the brokenness that leaves people feeling exposed and unsupported in their pregnancies. Addressing these things will also address the abortion rates. There is a reason that abortion statistics in most nations are highest among lower socio-economic and marginalised groups. We Christians who are pro-life need to make sure that if someone does make that choice and goes through the heartbreaking procedure, that they know that we’ll be the first to greet them with open arms and a truly loving hug. How we conduct ourselves in these sort of discussions shapes all of that.

We live in a broken world. That broken world needs healers – the Spirit that fills us is a healer. Our passion is needed to protect the vulnerable, but we need to be wary of making sure that our passion to protect one vulnerable group does not simply crush another vulnerable group. I beg you and implore us all, no matter where we sit on the this issue, to approach it, and how we talk about it, with a soft heart.

If you’re feeling angry I would encourage you to take time to pause in silence, breath for a while and then sit in prayer for the unborn, those who go through abortions, the medical staff involved in the processes and the politicians who shape our legislation.

Update: It disappoints me that some Christians have read a call to pausing before God in silence and prayer for all those affected by this issue, including those we disagree with, as some sort of passive response. I do not view it in such a light at all. To do so challenges me, it calls me to humility and submission to God. It calls me to view those I disagree with in a light that my own broken humanity struggles with. Most of all it calls on God to act in ways that I never could and for the alignment of my own being within that action. Hopefully it would be the same challenge for many of us.

For those who feel despair at the current political space in New Zealand because of this issue and others, it’s easy to place our hope in what happens in national politics, especially in an election year when it constantly hits the headlines, but this is something I said on Facebook that I think is worth remembering:

As people share their despair about recent happenings within the scene of our national politics I am reminded that our real hope doesn’t sit in politicians who make their way in and out of our Parliament buildings, but in the service and sacrifice of ordinary people who live their lives out of love for one another every single day no matter what goes on in the halls of power. These are people who are fueled, whether they recognise it or not, by the Spirit of God who is constantly active in the world. In that undying, self giving love, something of the reality of God springs forth in the midst of all of this. No troubled political discourse, underhanded political dealing, or wayward policy can quench the fire of that Spirit.