Thabiti: I’d Rather Have Dead Babies than Support Trump
Thabiti Anyabwile, a popular writer at the Gospel Coalition and politically-focused Black Nationalist agitator, recently claimed in an op-ed in the Washington Post that ending Roe v Wade is not worth having to work with Donald Trump. In other words, Anyabwile argued that evangelical Christians should actively seek to oust the current president, even if it means we might otherwise end the atrocity of abortion.
Thabiti Anyabwile is the name chosen by Ron Burns to identify himself with the Black Nationalist movement. Burns has captured the heart of New Calvinists, having been promoted heavily by 9Marks founder and pastor of Capitol Hill Baptist Church in Washington, D.C., Mark Dever. With the support of evangelicalism’s most prolific Calvinist preachers and teachers, who were eager to have an articulate African American in their ranks, Burns’ Marxism caught many off guard. Although the Evangelical Intelligentsia leaders who were already left-of-center (like Tim Keller and Russell Moore) would rejoice in Burns’ growing revelations of personal progressivism, others were concerned with Burns’ trajectory, but were largely too afraid to address the problem with Burns, who wears his ethnicity as badge and is quick (like all Critical Race Theorists) to play the victim. Only Phil Johnson was bold enough to accuse Burns of “mission drift,” who would prove Johnson right by his repeated race-baiting language and political endorsement of Hillary Clinton for president. Predictably, Burns accused Johnson of “racist undertones.”
Burns, who had endorsed Bernie Sanders as the “best candidate” for black Americans in the Democratic primary, insinuated that abortion was a low priority for believers. We wrote about that in SBC Pastor, Thabiti Anyabwile, Suggests Unborn Babies Aren’t a Top Priority. We were told at the time that we’ve just misunderstood Burns. His op-ed today removes all doubt, however, that the Black Nationalist and Marxist leader is willing to sacrifice the lives of the unborn for the sake of his political philosophy.
Although he refers to himself as “pro-life” in the first paragraph of his post, Anyabwile makes clear that Christians should – in his opinion – oppose the current POTUS even if POTUS is trying to end abortion.
With news Wednesday of the summer retirement of Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, now 81, those Christian voters who opted for Trump with the hope of conservative Supreme Court appointments seem vindicated by their vote. At least that’s how some Christians who once pronounced the 2016 election “God’s judgment on America” seem to read providence now. Their “compromise” in voting for Trump appears to bring Christian America one step closer to a country without Roe.
But it does not bring us a step closer to a country without woe.
Burns’ point is presupposed upon the idea that a vote for Donald Trump in the general election was by necessity a “compromise” (voting for Clinton was not a compromise in his view). Burns used his op-ed in the WaPo to lash out at Christians who voted for Trump and who feel vindicated in the wisdom of their vote, given the impending nomination of Trump’s second likely pro-life Supreme Court justice.
Burns then began his politically-flooded liberal treatise against the unborn by writing about a group of pastors with whom he meets, one of which is of Venezuelan descent, and who lamented Trump’s policy of following immigration law. Of this, Burns writes:
Of course, the travel ban’s core aim is to exclude potential visitors and immigrants from majority-Muslim countries, an intent at odds with Christian views of religious freedom.
It should not surprise us that Burns – a Marxist and globalist – characterizes a common sense immigration policy designed for national security as “at odds with Christian views of religious freedom.” This claim is absurd for several reasons, including that (1) Obama had implemented a harsher policy than Trump’s, to no criticism from the left (2) these countries only represent 8% of the world’s Muslims, but instead, represent terrorist nations. Furthermore, national borders and boundaries were invented by God Himself, and not juxtaposed against the Holy Scripture. Finally, whether or not a citizen of the United States has the liberty to worship whatever god they choose has nothing to do with whether or not those of other religions (or countries) are somehow entitled to come as immigrants from nations that regularly support acts of terror against our republic.
The insanity of Burns’ facts-deaf leftism aside (and yes, he mentions “Russian collusion” in his article, I kid you not), his overall point is that the Trump administration is capable of great evils that are even more wicked than the grievous sin of abortion. Burns’ argument is that abortion is bad, but racism is worse than abortion. Furthermore, Burns makes the thought-leap that Trump (and Republicans and conservatives et al) is racist.
The potential nomination of a potential pro-life judge does not, in my opinion, alleviate the concerns I have about the racial injustices this same administration seems to multiply each day. What many evangelicals don’t seem to understand is they’re turning blind eyes to their brethren suffering at the hands of this administration for the long-held hope of overturning Roe. I’m for overturning Roe, but I’m also for protecting black and brown lives from racism and the kind of criminalization that swells our prisons and devastates communities or separates families at the borders.
Burns makes the rather humanitarian policy not to incarcerate children with their criminal parents the moral equivalent – nay, morally worse – than murdering children. Trump, Burns argues, is advancing racism against “black and brown lives” and this must take priority above ending the murder of millions of black and brown babies who are disproportionately slaughtered in the womb.
Some Christians appear to have made a Faustian bargain for the mere price of a Supreme Court nominee. The Devil gets the better end of that deal!
Again, Burns lashes out at Christians celebrating the opportunity to nominate another conservative to the courts who will be more likely to overturn Roe v Wade. To Burns, the inherently racist policies of Donald Trump and the Republican Party are not worth ending the greatest evil the world has ever known. And if that’s what it means to be “pro-life,” we need less of it.
Russell Moore and the rest of the “woke” Social Justice movement in evangelicalism have convinced many that their movement is trans-political, or perhaps even apolitical. These are Gospel™-centered men who just happen to think that the Bible approves of illegal immigration and is kind of chill with abortion. In reality, what Burns demonstrates, is that the movement is as political as the Moral Majority ever was; they’re just on the other side.