Tag archives: Hyde Amendment

Southern Baptist Convention Defends the Hyde Amendment

by David Closson

June 28, 2021

This is the final part of a three-part series highlighting significant resolutions passed by the Southern Baptist Convention this year that apply a biblical worldview to critical cultural and political issues. Read part one and part two.

Last week, America’s largest Protestant denomination, the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC), held its annual meeting for the purpose of hearing updates from various seminaries, electing new leaders, and passing various resolutions.

Dozens of resolutions are submitted at every annual SBC meeting. Only a handful are accepted by the Resolution Committee and brought to a vote. If a resolution passes, that means the SBC is collectively agreeing to publicly affirm the statement contained in the resolution. Resolutions are traditionally in response to various cultural developments, social ideologies, or legislation under consideration by the United States Congress. One of the prominent resolutions passed during the 2021 convention was in defense of the Hyde Amendment.

The Hyde Amendment, which prevents federal tax dollars from being used to pay for abortions, has been included in every federal spending bill since 1976, when it was first passed by a 312-93 vote. The amendment has long enjoyed bipartisan support; however, the Biden administration did not include Hyde in its recent budget plan. The SBC’s resolution urges the administration to reconsider its position and uphold Hyde.

You can read all of the resolutions passed by the SBC here. Read the resolution “On Taxpayer Complicity in Abortion and the Hyde Amendment,” reprinted here:

WHEREAS, The Bible clearly and unequivocally affirms the sanctity of every human life made in God’s image (Genesis 1:27; 9:6), a truth to which Christians in every century have testified and are called to bear witness in every age and in every sphere of life; and

WHEREAS, Southern Baptists have historically affirmed biblical teaching regarding the sanctity of human life by supporting and funding pro-life initiatives and by adopting numerous pro-life resolutions at national, state, and associational meetings; and

WHEREAS, Since 1973 more than 60 million unborn children have had their lives tragically ended through the evil genocide of abortion as a result of the Supreme Court’s morally repugnant and unconstitutional ruling in Roe v. Wade; and

WHEREAS, The bipartisan, nearly half-century-old Hyde Amendment, enacted in 1976 and reinstated by every administration since, has heretofore prevented financial complicity in the sin of abortion by preventing federal tax dollars from paying for abortions or for health benefits that include coverage of abortion; and

WHEREAS, The Hyde Amendment has saved more than an estimated 2 million lives since its enactment and enjoys broad support from the American public; and

WHEREAS, Congress has consistently passed a wide range of Hyde-like amendments that protect taxpayer funds from being used for abortions in other federal programs (the Dornan and Smith Amendments), in international aid (the Helms, Siljander, and Tiahrt Amendments), in research (the Dickey-Wicker Amendment), and for medical providers and others who object to abortion (the Hyde-Weldon and Nickles Amendments); and

WHEREAS, The current administration has proposed eliminating the Hyde Amendment in its budget proposal, thus advocating to make taxpayer money available to fund abortion procedures; and

WHEREAS, Any party platform that explicitly calls for the repeal of the Hyde Amendment evidences a wanton disregard for human dignity and a culture of life; and

WHEREAS, Opposition to the Hyde Amendment represents an effort to make every American citizen complicit in high-handed moral rebellion against the Author of Life (Acts 3:15); now, therefore, be it

RESOLVED, That the messengers of the Southern Baptist Convention meeting in Nashville, Tennessee, June 15-16, 2021, condemn any effort to repeal the Hyde Amendment as morally abhorrent, a violation of Biblical ethics, contrary to the natural law, and a moral stain on our nation; and be it further

RESOLVED, That Southern Baptists call on Congress and the President to uphold the Hyde Amendment and all pro-life Amendments, to protect life, and to prevent taxpayers from being complicit in the moral evil of abortion; and be it finally

RESOLVED, That Southern Baptists should work through all available cultural and legislative means to end the moral scourge of abortion as we also seek to love, care for, and minister to women who are victimized by the unjust abortion industry.  

With this resolution, the SBC is taking a stand not only for the sanctity of human life, but also for freedom of conscience and religion. If the Hyde Amendment is removed from federal spending bills, these essential human rights will be under threat.

Let us pray and do everything we can to end the injustice of abortion. We must remember to “Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them” (Eph. 5:11).

Is Abortion the Solution to Women’s Problems?

by Mary Szoch

December 10, 2020

On December 8, the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health, and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies held a hearing entitled “The Impact on Women Seeking an Abortion but are Denied Because of an Inability to Pay.” Based on the title, some may think this hearing was about finding ways to actually improve the lives of pregnant women in need, but that was certainly not the case. 

In her opening remarks, Chairwoman Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) made it clear that this hearing was about removing the Hyde Amendment. She began,Roe v. Wade is the law of the land, yet for too long some women in this country have been denied their right to an abortion. The Hyde Amendment is a discriminatory policy. For more than 40 years, it has been routinely extended—every year as a legislative rider—but the time has come in this current moment to reckon with the norm, with the status quo, and view it through the lens of how it impacts communities of color.”  

Since 1976, the so-called “discriminatory” Hyde Amendment has been included in each annual spending bill and has maintained widespread bipartisan support. Hyde does not restrict abortion in and of itself; it merely states that taxpayer funding cannot be used to pay for abortions, except in cases of rape, incest, and saving the life of the mother. A 2020 Marist poll found that 60 percent of Americans, including 37 percent of people who identify themselves as pro-choice, oppose taxpayer funding of abortion. Contrary to DeLauro’s claims, Hyde is not discriminatory at all. Instead, it simply aims to protect taxpayers from paying for a practice they believe is the killing of an innocent unborn baby.

DeLauro went on to explain what she believes Hyde’s impact on communities of color has been. She stated that women who are seeking an abortion but are denied are four times more likely to live below the Federal Poverty Level, more likely to experience serious complications at the end of pregnancy (such as eclampsia and death), more likely to stay with an abusive partner, more likely to suffer anxiety and loss of self-esteem, and less likely to have aspirational plans for their future. 

DeLauro’s comments relied on the “Abortion Turnaway Study” conducted by the strongly pro-abortion Bixby Center for Global Reproductive Health at the University of California, San Francisco. Though touted by mainstream media as a reputable study, the methodology of the study was flawed, and the results were tailored to fit the picture the researchers set out to present. That is, that few women regret their abortion, and being denied an abortion has serious negative consequences on a woman’s health and well-being.      

Imagine for a minute though, that DeLauro’s comments were accurate. Imagine that women carrying an unwanted child to birth are four times more likely to live below the poverty line, experience serious pregnancy complications, stay with an abusive partner, suffer anxiety and loss of self-esteem, and have less aspirational plans for their future. Wouldn’t the solution to this bleak situation look something like providing these women with better health care, affordable housing, childcare, job coaching, counseling, tutoring, mentors, and friends? That is the work of pregnancy resource centers, like the ones Christiana Bennett referenced during the hearing. These centers—Care Net, Heartbeat International, the Gabriel Network, and Birthright, to name a few—are lifelines and beacons of hope for women. Their message to pregnant women with nowhere else to turn is: “You can do it! And we’ll be right here to help you!” Rosa DeLauro’s message, on the other hand, is: “No, you can’t…unless taxpayers pay for you to abort your child.”  

In her remarks, DeLauro failed to mention that the Hyde Amendment has saved over two million lives—many of whom are people of color. Hyde’s removal will most certainly increase abortions. Women who are pregnant and in need face incredibly challenging situations—lack of health care, homelessness, abuse, food insecurity, the list goes on and on. Rosa DeLauro’s solution is for taxpayers to pay for these women to kill their unborn children. Clearly, she and the pro-abortion members of Congress who claim to represent women’s rights need to reconsider how they can best help women.

Obama’s Grim Fairy Tale

by Robert Morrison

May 7, 2009

President Obama is offering up a new version of the old fable of the stone soup. You’ll recall the Brothers Grimm fairy tale where the strangers come to town, offering nothing but a stone in the bottom of their kettle. They persuade the townspeople to add some potatoes, carrots, and soup bones, just for “garnish.” Soon they had a feast-for free.

In 1976, candidate Jimmy Carter came to Iowa. He said he “didn’t like abortion.” And he pledged to reduce “the need for abortion.” This at least was something.

To most people, the Republican candidate wasn’t even offering a stone. President Ford never mentioned abortion, or the Supreme Court’s 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling that legalized abortion-on-demand. He let the First Lady, Betty Ford, speak out, offering her strongly pro-abortion views.

The Republican Party actually condemned Roe v. Wade in its 1976 platform. But President Ford ignored that fact, and a biased press played up Mrs. Ford’s vocal support. In her memoirs, Betty Ford praised her hubby for “letting me do all the talking about abortion. That was wise of him,” she said. It was wise only if Ford didn’t need Pennsylvania and Ohio.

Liberal journalist Elizabeth Drew praised Carter for wrapping “a liberal policy stance in conservative rhetoric.” Carter went on to win the election. He named hundreds of judges to the federal judiciary, but not one pro-lifer.

He did, however, name the pro-life Joe Califano as Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, the predecessor to HHS. Carter also supported and signed the Hyde Amendment, which banned federal funding of abortion, something Ford had allowed to go forward.

Obama is using Carter’s successful rhetoric without even a scintilla of Carter’s significant concessions to pro-life sentiment. Under Obama, we are being forced to pay to promote abortions around the world. We may be forced to pay for abortion-on-demand in his health care takeover. Pro-life doctors and nurses could be forced to take part in killing unborn children-or, more likely, killing their careers rather than compromise their conscience. Obama’s rhetoric is appealing, rather like that nice hot stone soup. But his common ground is as lacking in substance as that empty kettle. The morning after, we’ll awake to find it was only “some enchanted evening.”

Archives