By MICHAEL TAVOLIERO
Humankind has come to the flash of insight in our understanding that the cellular and molecular evidence proves human life begins at conception. In other words, when the moment a sperm fuses with an egg to form a fertilized egg cell, human life, an alive person, appears.
I am not a scientist but by exploring the events at fertilization and the subsequent developmental continuum, we all can come to this conclusion.
Based on cellular, molecular, and developmental biology, the evidence clearly shows that human life begins at conception. The zygote’s unique genome, a full set of chromosomes, irrevocably establishes a distinct genetic identity, marking the emergence of a new individual. Its inherent ability to differentiate into every cell type required to form a complete human being underscores an unbroken developmental continuum from fertilization onward. Although ethical and philosophical debates persist, the scientific foundation that human development starts at conception remains unequivocal.
Human life, in its most fundamental and universal presence, begins with conception.
Under Alaska law, AS 11.41.150 establishes the crime of murder of an unborn child when there is intent to cause the death of an unborn child.
The Bible emphasizes the intimate involvement of God in our creation even before birth.
For instance, in Psalm 139:13-16, David writes, “For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother’s womb,” highlighting that each person is fashioned by God from the very beginning. Similarly, Jeremiah 1:5 declares, “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I set you apart,” suggesting that God’s knowledge and purpose for each individual is established even prior to birth. These passages affirm the sacred nature of life in the womb and underscore the belief that every human being is known, valued, and purposefully created by God from conception.
Whether you’re an uncompromising atheist or an excessively pious biblical literalist, the inescapable truth remains human life begins at conception.
Since abortion’s legalization by the Alaska Legislature in 1970 (before Roe v.Wade in 1973), the Alaska Church has chosen to ignore the tragedy and evil of abortion. Clearly, it is, in many ways, to cover up our ethical vulnerability with convenient theology.
In Alaska, many churches that pride themselves on moral leadership have conspicuously avoided taking a definitive stance on abortion. Rather than engaging in the hard ethical questions that abortion presents, these institutions offer a thin, convenient veneer of doctrine. It is a theological fig leaf offered to mask the Church’s inaction. By emphasizing ritual and superficial expressions of faith over meaningful moral discernment, the Church not only sidesteps a critical issue but also risk betraying the deeper ethical responsibilities it claims to uphold.
In the Alaska Church, where many claim to stand as bastions of virtue, the failure to address abortion head-on resembles a self-imposed exile from the hard questions of ethical responsibility. Just as one might try to justify oneself before God by reciting creeds and tithing, the Alaskan church has thus avoided the difficult reality of its shortcomings on eliminating abortion in Alaska.
So too do some church leaders sidestep the issue of abortion, preferring to maintain an illusion of moral purity rather than engaging in the messy, often painful work of genuine moral discernment? No pain… no gain.
Can the Alaska Church challenge its church leaders and members to confront the moral implications of abortion rather than evade them? In Alaska, many churches have opted for silence or ambiguity on this issue, avoiding a definitive moral stance. By sidestepping the debate, these institutions not only shirk their responsibility to guide congregants on critical ethical matters but also leave unresolved profound questions regarding the sanctity of human life. With no blood on the lintel, the Angel of Death mercilessly murders Alaska’s unborn.
Churches are granted tax-exempt status under the Internal Revenue Code, which exempts them from federal income tax on donations and other income related to their religious activities. In exchange for this “privilege”, churches are prohibited from engaging in substantial political activity, including endorsing or opposing political candidates, so as to maintain a nonpartisan stance. Yet one must ask: hasn’t the Church historically been at the forefront of political engagement and social leadership?
This limitation on political speech ensures that the Alaska Church remains dedicated to their charitable and religious missions rather than becoming vehicles for moral and ethical advocacy. The unborn are silent and silenced.
This avoidance is not a neutral act; it is a deliberate choice to place one’s personal comfort and institutional self-interest above the call to confront injustice. Abortion is the single most evil injustice practiced by an immoral and unethical state.
In this case, injustice is absence of an ongoing abortion debate. It is a subject that demands both compassion and courage yet is too often dismissed by those who would rather cling to outdated dogmas and avoid controversy. By ignoring abortion, the Alaskan Church is not merely taking the easy path; it is, in effect, adopting a posture of moral indifference that risks becoming the very embodiment of the complacency and entitlement it professes to oppose.
Such a stance, while cloaked in the language of divine obedience, ultimately serves to subvert the true mission of the Alaskan Church. Instead of passionately serving God and the community, the focus shifts inward, toward preserving the sanctity of a self-serving institution. The result is a tragic irony: in seeking to avoid the wrath of a hard judge, the leadership of the Alaska Church not only fails to challenge the status quo but also undermine the very foundation of ethical leadership they claim to uphold.
The reluctance to take a clear united stand on abortion echoes the moral uncertainty found in the Parable of the Talents, forcing us to ask whether we have embraced an authentic, life-affirming faith in a loving God or settled for a watered-down, counterfeit version of the hard master?
By choosing silence and ambiguousness and by avoiding criticism and mockery, the Alaska church avoids confronting the uncomfortable truth that failing to fully commit to the protection of life is, in effect, a tacit endorsement of values that lead away from the true God. This evasion not only diminishes the inherent sanctity of life but also leaves congregants without the forthright and compassionate guidance needed to face Alaska’s most critical ethical challenges.
Thus, we are left with THE question: Will the Alaska Church, by avoiding the most critical moral issue of our time, genuinely serve and guide Alaska Christians, or will it simply choose to bury its talents beneath layers of self-delusion and doctrinal complacency?
Michael Tavoliero writes for Must Read Alaska.
Preach!! Abortion is merely a “nicer” term for killing and is the purest form of evil. The Church should be united in standing against it. To do otherwise is simply to submit to evil’s clutches…Do better, Church!
Amen! Life does begin at conception, and equally important it begins with honor and respect. My advice to this so called church: stop using the word abortion to describe what is murder. Always creating euphemisms to license lasciviousness and crime. Speaking to elements in society I call failure. Trading success for failure is human sacrifice. Trading a life for convenience is a road taken that leads to destruction. It is not a choice you want to be defined by.
Truth is not, and should not be, political. By simply preaching God’s Word is it is clearly put forth in the Bible sheds light on a whole litany of issues the godless try to politicize and the churches should not buy into that. The church should simply preach and teach truth. Abortion is murder. It is clear in science as well as God’s Word. Those that play games with this fact are either in denial or plan evil. Pray for their eyes to be opened and hearts to be changed.
Very well stated Elizabeth.
Yup. ALL sin is evil before a Holy God. Divorce, theft, greed, debt, lust etc. I, for one, don’t like divvying up various sins and making one particular one the one to champion over others. If all abortions in the U.S. were to stop immediately, it would change nothing. However, if all sin stopped immediately, it would be a different world! What causes abortion? First, it’s a baby un-intentionally conceived. Then there is guilt and shame and stress and anguish. It’s the result of lust, (though occasionally violence) not caring that God designed sex within the boundary and security of marriage. God allows sin so people might turn to Him. A ‘good’ church will call people to repentance and pray for their salvation. A true born-again believer indwelt by the Holy Spirit, then sides with God about the issue of life, of marriage, and personal purity. Most evangelical churches do take a stand against abortion, and their members vote pro-life. But it’s not the ONLY thing they dwell on.
Thank you Michael for a well written article on the terrible reality of abortion. Where the church can’t fight as a tax exempt organization it can fight individually at the voting booth. By electing people with high moral and Biblical standards as our representatives.
How can he say churches do nothing? Huh? Churches have funded and continue to support Crisis Pregnancy Centers in Anchorage & Wasilla. They have nice, new modern buildings and professional equipment like ultra sounds operated by a licensed medical practitioner. The one in Wasilla now has a mobile van they can drive to smaller communities on the road system. Pastors ARE allowed to talk about abortion and what the Bible says about babies in the womb. They occasionally feature a pro-life ministry as a guest speaker. While they cannot tell people who to vote for, they CAN urge their members to vote for the candidates who best upholds biblical values. I don’t know what churches he has attended, but sorry, I don’t know what he’s talking about. Woke churches, maybe?
A lot to unpack here with Tavoliero’s bulls-eye essay.
First, we ought to forget about the 501 (c) 3 exemptions, a creation of Lyndon Johnson. It is absolute nonsense when we see that minority churches routinely engage is specific political issues. It merely takes courage to defy the secular state.
Second, the Catholic Church has institutionally led the charge, nationwide and worldwide, but certainly NOT here in Alaska. And, under the pontificate of a heretical pope, is slowly backing off. The local bishop has also threatened priests who refuse Holy Communion to Murky Lisa, whose cousin works in the Anchorage Chancery and has a malignant influence there. It is an Open Secret to Catholics.
Lastly, two big problems exist for both Protestants and Catholics: contraception. No, dear readers, contraception does NOT reduce abortion, it sets the table for it. And it was PROTESTANTS that led the fight against both abortion and contraception in the 19th century. They began wimping out in 1930. But, any Catholic priest (and evangelical pastor) who preaches against contraception will also face the ire of his superiors — and the walk-out of parishioners.
Then there is divorce. Forget the pastors. The problem lies with the laity in this one: Many prolife Christians, dead-set against abortion and known as ready Bible-quoters, are divorced-and-remarried. How is THAT for getting into our comfort zones? All you have to do is see what Christ said in Matthew’s gospel. Like contraception, divorce is connected with abortion. Sometimes directly, but usually indirectly.
Now, let’s deal with the secular sphere. The 1970 abortion law that legalized baby-killing flaunts common sense. It violates Article 1, Section 1 of the state constitution, but also mocks “protections” afforded to the unborn when it comes to inheritance and murder of the expectant mother. How scientific is “wantedness”? It is a JOKE to pretend that this makes logical sense.
Ergo, we DO NOT need a constitutional amendment to protect the unborn. We need a judiciary who will cancel the 1970 act. Or a Governor who will refuse to enforce, not only the 1970 statute, but also the underlay of judicial opinions, which falsely pass as “constitutional”.
This is NOT rocket science. Like transgender issues, it is laughably obvious, but only when we are honest with ourselves.
I’m slightly perplexed by the repeated use of “Alaska Church” as it is a singular entity, beholden to some sort of central control. As a person born into the Jewish faith and culture, I’m certainly not a member of a “church”, but I’ve been welcomed to celebrate services, weddings, memorials, funerals, and countless other community events in Christian churches. I’ve always been treated well and was not shunned for heresey or blasphemy, but I can truly attest that despite a shared Scripture, Christian congregations here are not a monolith, nor do they seek to answer to a singular political definition. Their Lord is Jesus Christ, and they don’t seem interested in being under the umbrella of “The Alaska Church”. I have noticed, however, certain so-called “conservatives” be overly interested in attempting to define how other people worship, and define what is “right” and “wrong” about how they do so. Sad!
In the same manner, the Alaska Church is sinfully complacent about upholding Biblical doctrine for sexual relationships, which is to be practiced only in a lifelong heterosexual marriage. The Alaska Church preaches mainly a nebulous and unconditional love of God for mankind, while glossing over God’s unambiguous and righteous commandments as recorded in both testaments.
Next, the Church mostly ignores the doctrine of our needful fear (a profound awe and respect) of a holy and almighty God, the eternal Judge of all human matters. Added up, there is no limit to the degeneracy of Church doctrine and practice.
I’m signing off now to attend a church for worship and thanksgiving, for the fellowship of believers, and – certainly, importantly – for the confession and repentance of my sins. Our God is merciful, but He is not to be taken for granted or ignored.
It’s horrific that people in this nation have declared war on our children.
Maybe we just need another Tenth Plague.
I have put off reading this article, knowing what I would find written herein, and knowing what I must say:
1. The Catholic Church does not speak for all Christendom.
2. The primary focus of Christianity is the saving relationship accomplished by Jesus Christ on the Cross and His subsequent Resurrection from the dead – between the believer and God. We are ALL sinners in need of the Savior – and no matter how heinous and disturbing the murder of innocents is, ending all abortion is not the primary focus of Christianity any more than ending any other sin.
3. Outlawing abortion is a worthy goal.
4. Pro-life organizations have no incentive to succeed – they would lose their ability to raise funds instantly.
5. While every church I’m aware of calls abortion sin, we are all greatly fatigued by this war – and choose to focus on saving souls.
Lay your guilt elsewhere my friend.