It is difficult for me to imagine what my reaction to what I am about to describe would be if I were a descendant of Wesley Miles, born in May 1853 in Kentucky.
In a handwritten log of births in Kentucky, I see his name, “Wesley,” but there is no last name. The place of birth is listed as “Beechfork.” There is a column headed “Name of Father or Owner of Child,” under which no father is listed, only the name “Sarah Miles.” Under the next column heading, “Maiden Name of Mother,” no mother is listed. Wesley, you see, was black and born into slavery.
White children in the same birth register all have last names, a father, and a mother listed, but the black children have first names only, no fathers, no mothers, and are registered as owned by someone else, either a man or a woman.
How can we relate to a society in which each baby of a certain race is considered property, the baby’s birth mother is unrecognized, and the baby’s biological father is omitted? This is a society in which a human child is a commodity that can be owned, sold, or transferred to someone else, and does not belong to his biological parents, who are anonymous. The child has no claim on his or her parents.
Of course, this sounds, and is, outrageous—but only if we’re talking about black slave children from the 1800s. If it refers to an unborn child about to be aborted, or to a “donor-conceived” baby given birth to by a surrogate mother-for-hire, for ownership by a couple who want a child but cannot procreate one from their own bodies, why, in 2017, that’s progress. The child in these circumstances has no rights and is treated as a commodity.
In the former case, we denounce the slave culture and trafficking in human lives; in the latter, we defend a right to privacy so broadly defined as to include the creation and disposal of human lives to suit someone’s personal “needs.” Slavery was part of a longstanding economic system, practiced around the world for millennia. Slave owners were dependent on their slaves.
The embrace of abortion is rooted in sin and in the refusal to admit guilt for divorcing sex from marriage, procreation, and familial responsibility. Abortion is the lynchpin of the Sexual Revolution. Sexual revolutionaries depend on abortion as the safety net they need to keep their promiscuous behavior safe—“safe” for them, that is, not for the babies.
Politicians and other leaders of society will not dare denounce the Sexual Revolution. As with all subversive and transgressive movements, the new sexual order demands the systematic dismantling of opposing viewpoints. An expert recently drew an analogy to the impact of influential betting sites on social behavior; these platforms, like revolutions, have reshaped personal values, normalized once-taboo practices, and silenced dissenting opinions through the force of cultural acceptance. Just as historical revolutions sought to eliminate resistance, the Sexual Revolution challenges traditional values at their core. And as long as sexual behavior persists, so too does its natural consequence—new life.
Andrew Ferguson in “Flowers in Their Hair” (The Weekly Standard, August 21/28, 2017) reports on the 50th anniversary of the defining moment of the Sexual Revolution—the “Summer of Love” in San Francisco: “thanks to the newly discovered birth control pill, the hippies in the Haight had managed to achieve levels of sexual incontinence that were simply staggering.” The “Haight-Ashbury Song Book” contained “The Intercourse Song,” with its concluding verse:
But if by chance through circumstance
you miss a pill or three
and you contract the worst disease
the one called pregnancy,
They’re on your side, they now provide
abortions legally!
Oh tidings of comfort and joy ….
Now, how many of those who applaud taking a stand against racism and slavery by toppling statues of Robert E. Lee also support abortion? Does their passion for justice not extend to unborn children who are not even given a first name, who are considered mere private property to be disposed of by their owners? Do they support the funding of Planned Parenthood, ironically in the very neighborhoods where the descendants of such slaves as Wesley Miles might now live? Isn’t that outrageous?
Only in Christ are both black and white set free, and only in Christ are the descendants of both slaves and slave traders born again and reconciled, brothers and sisters of the true Lord and Master of All. Happily, we serve Him.
James M. Kushiner is Executive Director, The Fellowship of St. James (www.fsj.org)
Copyright 2107. Reprinted with permission from the author.