Delaware is on the verge of adopting one of the most extreme abortion policies in the nation. The proposed constitutional amendment, SB 5, enshrines “reproductive freedom” as a fundamental right — but at what cost? It represents a dangerous new frontier in the sexual revolution. This amendment, under the guise of protecting healthcare, does not actually provide for legitimate medical needs — it entrenches the ideology that human life, at its earliest stages, is disposable and that bodily autonomy trumps moral responsibility. From a biblical worldview, this is more than just a legal issue. It is a profound moral and spiritual crisis.
The image of God and the value of life
Scripture is clear that human beings are made in the image of God (Genesis 1:27). This means that from the moment of conception, a human life possesses inherent dignity and worth. The amendment’s sweeping language, which ensures the right to make “decisions about all matters relating to pregnancy, including … abortion care,” directly contradicts this truth by permitting the destruction of the preborn without moral or legal consequence.
Get Our Latest News for FREE
Subscribe to get daily/weekly email with the top stories (plus special offers!) from The Christian Post. Be the first to know.
Nancy Pearcey, in Love Thy Body, highlights this destructive worldview as she points out the inherent duality of the personhood theory. It views the body as a mere biological organism, where the real person is limited to their consciousness and ability to be self-aware. The personhood theory is embodied in the phrase from the philosopher Descartes when he says, “I think therefore I am.” This is precisely why SB 5 is dangerous: it reduces human value to self-awareness rather than inherent dignity. By enshrining abortion as a constitutional right, prohibiting it from being “denied, burdened, [or] infringed,” the SB 5 implicitly treats the preborn child as less than fully human — a mere choice rather than a life made in the image of God.
Fleeing from — not codifying — sexual immorality
1 Corinthians 6:18 exhorts us to “flee from sexual immorality.” Yet this amendment, rather than encouraging responsibility and moral integrity, does the exact opposite. By guaranteeing unrestricted access to sterilization, and abortion, this amendment removes any connection between sexuality and responsibility.
This is the same destructive ideology that fueled the sexual revolution of the 1960s, which promised freedom but delivered broken families, rising abortion rates, and a culture steeped in moral confusion. During this period, the focus of marriage shifted from being primarily about procreation and family stability to self-fulfillment and personal satisfaction, a shift that contributed to the erosion of traditional moral boundaries.
Carl Trueman, in The Rise and Triumph of the Modern Self, explains how “expressive individualism” has become the dominant philosophy of the modern age. He writes that this ideology prioritizes self-definition and personal authenticity above all else, even at the expense of moral and social order. This mindset fuels policies like SB 5, which enshrine personal autonomy as the highest good, ignoring the natural results that come with human sexuality — completely forsaking any semblance of responsibility on the issue.
Nancy Pearcey again offers clarity on this issue as she points out how the sexual revolution provides a low view of the body. Rather than respecting the body and the biblical view of human sexuality reserved for marriage and procreation, it presents a separation between what the body does and the whole person. SB 5 continues that legacy, sending the message that sexuality is purely about personal desire rather than being rooted in God’s design for marriage, family, and procreation.
The state’s role in promoting good, not permitting harm
While the government exists to uphold justice and defend the vulnerable (Romans 13:1-4), SB 5 does the opposite — it legislates the unchecked power to end life in the womb. 1 Peter 2:13-14 further affirms that rulers are meant to uphold justice by commending righteousness and restraining wrongdoing. The amendment’s language, which prohibits the state from “denying, burdening, or infringing upon” reproductive freedom creates a virtually unlimited right to abortion and other procedures. It prioritizes personal choice over the fundamental moral order that God has established. In doing so, it undermines the state’s role in protecting the most vulnerable among us — the preborn — who have no voice in this decision.
Moreover, the amendment would significantly hinder efforts to prevent the sterilization of minors. Establishing an unrestricted right to “reproductive freedom” opens the door for minors to undergo life-altering procedures such as sterilization without parental consent or appropriate safeguards. This not only strips parents of their rightful role in guiding their children but also exposes young individuals to irreversible medical interventions based on transient feelings or external pressures. A society that permits such actions under the guise of autonomy is one that has lost sight of its duty to protect its most vulnerable members.
Proponents argue that this measure simply safeguards rights, but it rejects the science that clearly defines the distinct and separate humanity of the unborn life. It ultimately cements the secular worldview that sees human life as a commodity rather than a sacred gift. When morality is stripped away, the law follows suit, enshrining practices that are not only destructive but deeply offensive to the Creator who gave us life.
Choosing life over moral chaos
The passage of this amendment would not be a victory for freedom, but a tragic step toward further moral decay. Christians must stand firm in proclaiming that true freedom is found not in unrestricted autonomy but in submission to God’s perfect design. Lawmakers should reject this radical expansion of the sexual revolution and instead advocate for policies that uphold the sanctity of life and the dignity of the human body. Rather than codifying the destruction of life, family, and marriage, we should be working to rebuild a culture that honors and upholds them.
Delaware has a choice: to affirm life or to deepen moral confusion. Christians must boldly defend God’s design for life, family, and justice — and urge lawmakers to reject SB 5.
Nandi Randolph is a policy analyst with DE Family Policy Council.
Be the first to comment