Pro-lifers should not condone premarital sex as a pathway to marriage

Mike Adams on abortion: click for larger image.
Mike Adams on abortion: click for larger image.

Professor Mike S. Adams is pro-life, but he posted something on Facebook that I must disagree with.

He posted this:

Over 80% of post-abortive women said they would have had the baby if the guy had been supportive. Five guys find out their girl is pregnant: The first two pressure abortion, the third walks away or was never present, the fourth sticks around for 80 to 120 days, and the fifth steps up totally. This not a woman’s problem. It is a lack-of-manhood problem.

Mike has about 5000 friends, and 44 of them liked it. I would think that most of these people would call themselves pro-life conservatives. But I don’t think what he posted promotes the pro-life cause.

I replied to him with this:

Mike I could not disagree more. It’s a woman’s problem unless it is rape, since the woman consents to sex with a man she is not married to. In fact, the cause of abortion is YOUR opinion – namely, the opinion that women should not be obligated to be chaste or to think rationally about who they are having sex with. There is a path to marriage that goes through courtship, and that path has a name: self-control. Stop enabling the poor choices of women, because we have to stop the murder of unborn children.

Many of Mike’s friends supported him. So I wrote this:

Wow. I had no idea that so many of Mike’s friends think that the Bible is a pack of lies when it says that fornication is morally wrong. I guess you guys aren’t Christians then, since you feel so free and easy about revising the Bible when you feel like it.

If fornication is wrong, it’s wrong for women AND men. And you don’t fornicate and then expect happy outcomes from it. There is a word for a person who sins and then expects a good outcome. A FOOL.

Then Mike replied to me:

Sorry Wintery. Where I come from the man leads and is, therefore, responsible.

I replied to that with this:

Mike, I agree with male leading – IF the man is a Christian. But the men that these women chose are not Christians. And you can’t expect men to act morally unless they have a theistic framework that grounds morality.

Women should not be told, by you and others, that they can choose to have sex with immoral men and then expect the immoral men to act morally. That is just enabling abortion by justifying a lack of prudence and wisdom. Instead, we should be holding women accountable to choose men who WILL control themselves.

We should not be supporting the fantasy view of love that says  that recreational sex magically leads men to commit to protect, provide and lead women for life. That view is neither wise nor Biblical. On the contrary, recreational sex leads men to NOT commit. Women have to learn how to select men, to evaluate them for marriage, and to make them prove themselves. We need to tell men AND women that sex before marriage is morally wrong. And we need to be convincing by showing them how recreational sex does not lead to stable marriages, and puts children, unborn and born, in harm’s way. Telling the truth about the danger of premarital sex is the best way to stop the killing of unborn children.

Here’s an example to make the point. We do not blame bears for mauling campers. Bears are bears, and they were bears before the campers showed up in their cave. We ought to blame the camper for choosing to wander off the trail and into the bear’s den in order to PET THE BEAR. Wild bears may eat free food that is offered to them, but they are not going to let you pet them and hug them. Women, like campers, need to be responsible. They need to choose the right man for marriage. They need to exercise self control. They need to make the man prove his ability to commit and support a family BEFORE they have sex with him. No one hires an employee without understanding what job they need done and then making sure that the candidate they choose can do the job. And that’s what we need to tell women.

Obviously, I was a little upset when I wrote that, but I hope it wasn’t too bad.

So what’s the point I was trying to make by being critical of Mike? I think the problem we have today is that men who are pro-life are unwilling to hold women accountable for their own poor decisions about sex and marriage. Basically, conservative and/or Christian men think that women don’t need to think through what choices are most likely to avoid abortion and most likely to achieve marriage. These men give tacit approval to the popular trend of trying to achieve marriage through premarital sex (or cohabitation), when the research shows that these behaviors do not result in long-lasting stable marriages. In fact, sex out of wedlock is a good way to get into a situation where an abortion will occur.

In my view, Mike is ainadvertently encouraging women to get into the situations where they will be pressured to abort by reinforcing the idea that there is nothing wrong with their plan to achieve marriage by having premarital sex (or cohabitating), and then expecting men to respond to their pregnancy by MARRYING them. Mike seems to be telling women that it is normal for them to expect that marriage will follow from premarital sex with men who have not been vetted for the roles of provider, protector and leader As if marriage is natural for men who don’t even have jobs and who are surrounded by women willing to have sex with them on the first date. Any man who will have recreational premarital sex with a woman is exactly the kind of person who will not commit to lifelong providing and fidelity – he is having sex before marriage because he wants recreation, without the commitment and self-sacrifice that marriage requires. Rationally speaking, it makes no sense for men to buy the cow, and to keep buying the cow with 40 years of labor, when they can get the milk for free. And that’s what we need to tell women – think with your minds, not with your emotions.

Here is an interesting statistic from Relevant Magazine:

[A] recent study reveals that 88 percent of unmarried young adults (ages 18-29) are having sex. The same study, conducted by The National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy, reveals the number doesnʼt drop much among Christians. Of those surveyed who self-identify as “evangelical,” 80 percent say they have had sex.

[…]In addition to having premarital sex, an alarming number of unmarried Christians are getting pregnant. Among unmarried evangelical women between the ages of 18 and 29, 30 percent have experienced a pregnancy (a number thatʼs actually 1 percent higher than among those who donʼt claim to be evangelical).

According to the Guttmacher Institute, nearly half of all pregnancies in America are unintended. And of those, 40 percent end in abortion. More than 1 million abortions occur in the United States each year. But perhaps the most disturbing statistic for the Church: 65 percent of the women obtaining abortions identify themselves as either Protestant or Catholic (37 percent Protestant and 28 percent Catholic). Thatʼs 650,000 abortions obtained by Christians every year.

Christian women are not told that premarital sex is wrong by many Christians and conservatives – and out of that refusal by “Christians” and “conservatives” to take a stand, we get 650,000 abortions per year. We need to have more courage to tell women to be more self-controlled and responsible when they choose who to have sex with, and when to have sex. We need to tell women to make good decisions that lead to stable marriages. We need to tell women to study these issues and to support policies that produce strong, moral men who are willing to marry – for example, by reforming education so that our schools produce men who can find jobs, perhaps by having more male teachers in the classroom. We need to tell women to support policies that make marriage more friendly for men, like abolishing no-fault divorce, and promoting shared parenting. Christians in particular need to counteract the views of love and romance that are prevalent in popular culture with a view of relationships built around chastity and love. Although many people today are uncomfortable with moral absolutes and moral judgments, it would be a good be a good idea for women to promote these things, so that the men they are choosing from are more moral.

In the end, I agree with Mike S. Adams in one respect. Abortion may be caused by a lack of manhood problem. Only the lack of manhood doesn’t come from the men that women choose to have premarital sex with. The lack of manhood comes from men who refuse to hold women accountable for their own free foolish decisions that put unborn children in harm’s way. In addition to the abortion problem that results from those foolish decisions, there is also the explosion in out-of-wedlock births to weigh in the balance. Again, the more people tell women that they should expect men who engage in recreational sex to commit to marriage after premarital sex (or cohabitation), the more fatherlessness we get.

Giddy up, Mike.

Related posts

25 thoughts on “Pro-lifers should not condone premarital sex as a pathway to marriage”

  1. I think the article says young adults. Why do people like you always blame the woman. is it because men can’t get pregnant. How do you know their partners weren’t calling themselves Christians. As I said before, it takes two to make a bargain. My daughter was a Christian when she got pregnant after having sex just the once. The father also called himself a Christian. His response was ‘I’m too young to be a dad (20 at the time the same as my daughter) you’ll have to have an abortion.’ Next thing he remembers is waking up on the floor as my daughter hit him I’m afraid people like you make me sick. The woman’s the one who can get pregnant so therefore it’s her fault. But of course you are a man, therefore you mustn’t blame your own gender, must you.

    When I was training for nursing we had a scenario put to us. Three women have sex the same night. One gets pregnant, one gets a sexually transmitted disease, the third doesn’t have anything happen. Which do you judge most, the one with the STD, or the one who got pregnant. What about the one who didn’t get anything. After all, they all had sex. What about the men they had sex with, do we judge them.

    Mostly, although not always, the men instigate sex. I am not agreeing with sex before marriage, but I am tired of the woman always getting the blame. When my daughter got pregnant our pastor at the church we were attending at the time had a good talk to her partner as well as her. He said they were equally to blame, and I agree with him.

    Like

  2. This not a woman’s problem. It is a lack-of-manhood problem

    You have got to, I mean got to, be kidding me. Really? It’s not the woman’s problem? It’s a “lack-of-manhood” problem? What? Is this guy trying to score points with his wife/girlfriend/feminists? Last time I checked, I’m pretty sure, maybe I’m wrong on this, but I think it takes two to “tango” wink-wink-nudge-nudge (if you know what I mean).

    This is not a man problem alone. I’m tired of rockstar pastors and guys like this using slogans like “man-up” (what does that even mean by the way? oh wait it’s catchy, that’s why they use it) and “lack-of-manhood” problem and oh yeah, it’s going to move merchandise likes books and get these guys speaking engagements.

    Honestly looked at I think it’s easy to see the problem is lust from both sexes and wanting to act on that lust without the “consequence,” i.e., the more than likely result from acting on that lust…the birth of a human being(s).

    Like

  3. You say it’s unreasonable to expect men to step up and take responsibility for their unborn child unless those men are Christians, with a moral framework conducive to responsibility. But isn’t it just as unreasonable to expect women to choose their sexual partners according to the terms you recommend, unless *they* are Christians? Are you talking specifically about Christians here, or people in general?

    Also, while I realise it was written in the heat of the moment, I dislike your bears analogy. “Bears are bears” – yes, amoral entities. Men are men – moral entities. You can’t blame a bear for mauling a hiker because bears are merely creatures of instinct and biological drive. A man who has premarital sex with a woman, on the other hand, does have a brain, a will and a moral sense, and it is thus just as much his responsibility to a) refrain from having sex, or b) failing that, deal morally with the consequences (pregnancy), as it is the woman’s responsibility to do those things.

    Men definitely bear partial responsibility in many cases of abortion. I have read many testimonies online by women whose boyfriends, partners and even husbands have bullied them into abortion against their will, and others who have had abortions out of a feeling of hopelessness, knowing those men would not support them through the process. Yes, those women bear guilt as well, but so do the men involved. It seems to me that’s the point Mike Adams was making, and I agree with it.

    Like

  4. From Knight’s Facebook comments stream:

    Just to be clear, I think that men and women are 50/50 responsible. But when I read comments like Mike’s I feel obligated to balance him out.

    Like

  5. I agree and disagree. All humans have morality written on their heart. Men AND women are both responsible…another part that I did not see here was how much irresponsible parenting causes young men and women to get into premarital situations at a very young age. Self-control needs to be taught to everyone. It is not just the woman’s job to uphold morality. We have to work together…

    Like

  6. Mostly, although not always, the men instigate sex. I am not agreeing with sex before marriage, but I am tired of the woman always getting the blame.

    Outdated stereotype. If it ever was true, it isn’t now. Many, many Christian men who are waiting til marriage — including myself, back in my single days — report seduction attempts from seemingly “good Christian women”.

    Like

    1. It is not an outdated stereotype. I’m sick and tired of the times I’ve heard men say to women. ‘If you love me you’d make love to me.’ i taught my kids and now my foster kids to say ‘If you love me, you’d wait.’ it is still the same, mostly it’s the men who instigate sex.

      Like

      1. It is not an outdated stereotype

        You need to get out more. Talk to the Christian virgin men you know; you’ll be shocked at the “alleycat” behavior of many single “Christian” women these days.

        A LOT of “Christian” women are playing the seduction game now. In some cases, they may be trying to guilt-trip (or pregnancy-trap) the man into marriage. And dumping the guy if he won’t have sex — yes, I had “Christian” women do this to me in my single days. And I’m not just talking marginal “Christians” who check “Christian” on the census box, these were women who knew the Bible, went to church, gave regularly, and were actively involved in Christian community life. They seemed like great Christians.. til I got to know them.

        You are of course correct that men are still doing it. I’ve heard all the same stories you have, from Christian female friends. But it’s no longer exclusively or even predominantly a male sin.

        Like

        1. I have heard a complaint against Christian men that I think is valid, and the complaint is that we are not aggressive enough at pursuing the good women who we do find. I think that Christian men should have a vision for what they are trying to accomplish with their marriages and then select a woman who can do that job and develop her strengths to fit the role. The phrase that I have been told by the good ones is that they hate being tempted by bad men and they need positive attention from good men in order to help them resist temptation. I think this obligation on men makes sense to me. No one is saying that good men have to throw away their chastity and chivalry on bad women. But there are good ones who need support. I think that Christian men ought to find those and give them support, whether they are able to carry it all all the way through to marriage or not.

          So I agree with men judging bad women, but I think it needs to be coupled with aggressive, deliberate, selfless, unconditional love for the good ones. Play board games with them, talk to them, give them stuff to read, send them flowers. Maybe it turns into marriage and maybe it doesn’t, but it’s good for men to take care of the neglected good women out there.

          Like

          1. I don’t know any male, Christian virgins

            Then ask repentant non-virgins who are currently abstinent, and are trying to date chastely to find wives. Or ask men who are now married, but who, like me, waited til the wedding.

            I suspect most of them will have stories of attempted seduction to tell. Unless they married really young and didn’t spend a lot of time in the dating world.

            Like

          2. I think if the person can go two years without having sex, then they should be eligible to marry, but with oversight (e.g. – just court them for longer and make them read/speak more on that topic). Like any other sin, there needs to be attention paid to the damage. I think that if they did it when they were non-Christians, then less oversight is needed. But they should be honest and non-defensive about it, and take responsibility.

            Like

  7. I totally agree with your post, and in my single days I cultivated friendships with a lot of single women including those whom I knew I would never marry. However…

    …I have been told by the good ones is that they hate being tempted by bad men and they need positive attention from good men in order to help them resist temptation.

    So why do they reject every good man who asks them out? I’ve heard this complaint too, and often it’s not true. But somehow the good men they reject, are “invisible” to them. Th

    Good men who get rejected over and over and over by Christian women have a tendency to give up after a while. Or, as in my case, I completely wrote off as “impossible” all the women I actually went to church with, and took my wife quest to the internet. (This approach was splendidly successful, by the way.)

    Like

    1. Honestly, when I was really good, and looking to marry in my 20s, my problem was that I was easily discouraged by the bad ones. I would advertise my interest in apologetics and politics and economics, and I found that IVCF and Crusade were inundated with “Christian socialists”, “Christian pacifists”, “Christian feminists” and so on. And none of them wanted to be led. I once met the most amazing amazing women when I was in grad school. She was a homeschooled, farm-raised student in integrated science, with a minor in ethics. She was just fresh as a daisy. I went totally nuts over her. So I decided to speak to her and found out that she had a complete separation between her faith and her vocation. So I lent her a lecture on postmodernism and relativism by Campus Crusade scholar Scott Waller, where he explains why Christians should have a truth-focused faith and an integration between faith and vocation, and she held onto it for 4 weeks before pushign it back across the table to me. It was experiences like that that caused me to stop trying. I really should have kept trying, but I just felt that whatever women wanted, I didn’t have it. At that time, I owned my own sports car, and had a 6-figure portfolio and a solid resume. No one ever asked me about any of that, though. Not one woman in IVCF or Crusade was interested in whether I could protect, provide and lead.

      Like

      1. When I met and married Len he had an old banger of a car and I earned more than him. if you love someone and want to spend the rest of your life with them, money and possesions don’t come into it. God himself said to store treasurers in heaven not on earth.

        I didn’t look for someone to marry and neither did Len. God just happened to put us together. We work TOGETHER. We support EACH OTHER. God made me better at some things and him better at others. He is the one who has been ill on and off for the last four years. What’s supposed to happen in that situation if the man has always done everything. I know women who have been in this situation and believe me, they are absolutely lost.

        Like

  8. WK, you’re totally right regarding Mike Adams. It’s in situations like these that you really learn about the philosophy that guides a person. Adams is a fairly conservative guy, but when push comes to shove he follows many of the tired old ideas of our feminized society. And it’s even more disappointing if he’s a Christian.

    Just think of the consequences of his style of thinking. Any woman, if she’s married, or involved with anyone else, doesn’t have to take responsibility. Gossip? Not her fault – the guy’s fault. She covets – his fault. She commits adultery, or doesn’t perform her wifely duties – his fault. This isn’t true to the Christian faith. And in the modern world, the assumption is complete equality. The only worldly way in which Adams is correct is if women didn’t have free will, and therefore couldn’t vote or own property. That’s not our world.

    Like

    1. I could not agree with you more! If only these Christians and conservatives took the needs of children seriously. They are the victims of this habit of telling women that they are not responsible for the consequences of not planning and evaluating men and relationships objectively and dispassionately.

      Like

    2. For once I agree regarding women, but men can’t have it both ways. Yes if a woman does anything wrong it’s her own fault, but people keep saying that about women having to go where the man leads. Either we do or we don’t. My husband is not responsible for my sins, any more than I am responsible for his. When we talk of partnership it DOES NOT MEAN that I have to do what he says, any more than he has to do what I say.

      Like

      1. I think this confuses two different issues. Just because the man is to lead his family does not mean that he will lead his wife into sin, or that the wife should follow him into sin. Just because you accept the biblical mandates for the family does not mean that you are relieved from staying away from sin.

        Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s