§ 1 The text
NASB
Proverbs 17:15, NASBHe who justifies the wicked and he who condemns the righteous, both of them alike are an abomination to the Lord.
“Laws should not prosecute women who obtain abortions; blanket immunity is just and prudent.”
§ 2 The argument
To 'justify the wicked' — to legally acquit those who take innocent life — is called an 'abomination.' Abolitionists apply this to statutory exceptions that pre-acquit everyone who procures an abortion: the law declares guiltless what God does not, which Scripture names as abhorrent.
§ 3 Context & notes
Central to the abolitionist critique of the 'nothing shall be construed to authorize prosecution of any woman' clause found in equal-protection/personhood bills (e.g., H.R. 722, 119th Congress). Note the honest tension: many pro-lifers argue for prosecutorial discretion or treating coerced/deceived mothers as second victims (see the steelman in the arguments file), not for 'justifying the wicked.' Present both.
§ 4 Themes
acquitting the guilty abomination exception clauses equal protection justice
§ 5 Discussion questions
- Scripture calls 'justifying the wicked' an abomination. Does a blanket immunity clause justify (declare guiltless) everyone who procures an abortion?
- How do we distinguish biblically between prosecutorial mercy toward a coerced mother and a statute that pre-acquits all mothers by design?
- Is 'we won't prosecute anyone' the same as 'we establish justice'?
§ 6 Related
§ 7 Sources
Cited works
Author & type
- U.S. Congress — primary/legislation
- Chris Maska, Texas Alliance for Life — opposing view