A Biblical Response to the Systemic Evil of Planned Parenthood

The question of abortion remains one of the most divisive moral and theological issues of modern society, and at the center of this debate stands Planned Parenthood. As the largest provider of abortion services in the United States, Planned Parenthood not only facilitates but also actively advocates for abortion as a fundamental right tied to personal autonomy and reproductive freedom. Its influence extends beyond clinical services into public discourse, shaping the cultural imagination of what it means to exercise choice, freedom, and even healthcare. For many evangelicals, however, Planned Parenthood’s position and practices raise profound ethical and theological concerns. The question is not merely about healthcare policy or women’s rights, but about the nature of human life, the authority of God over creation, and the moral order that structures human flourishing. This paper will seek to prove that Planned Parenthood’s promotion and facilitation of abortion reflects a systemic violation of the biblical doctrine of the sanctity of human life, undermines God’s creative authority over human personhood, and advances a cultural ethic of autonomy detached from divine moral order; therefore, evangelicals must respond with both prophetic critique of Planned Parenthood’s practices and compassionate advocacy for a life-affirming alternative rooted in the gospel of Jesus Christ.

To establish this argument, the paper will begin by grounding the sanctity of human life in biblical and theological foundations. Scripture testifies that human beings are uniquely created in the image of God (Genesis 1:26–28), that God is intimately involved in the formation of each life in the womb (Psalm 139:13–16), and that divine recognition of personhood occurs even before birth (Jeremiah 1:5; Luke 1:41). Theologically, these passages underscore that human life is not subject to the autonomous decisions of individuals or institutions but is a sacred gift entrusted to humanity by the Creator. Prominent philosophers, such as Karl Barth and John Stott, emphasize that life belongs ultimately to God; therefore, it must be received with reverence and protected as a sacred trust. Evangelical ethicists like Glen Stassen and David Gushee extend this theological foundation by highlighting the Christian responsibility to protect the vulnerable as a reflection of the kingdom of God’s justice and mercy.

The second major section will analyze Planned Parenthood’s philosophy and practices, with particular attention to its emphasis on reproductive autonomy. This ideological framework, deeply influenced by Margaret Sanger’s legacy, positions abortion as an expression of self-determination, severed from the biblical vision of stewardship of life. Statistical data will demonstrate the scope of Planned Parenthood’s involvement in abortion provision, while cultural analysis will show how the normalization of abortion as healthcare reshapes moral consciousness. The final major section will develop an evangelical public-theological response. On one hand, this entails a prophetic critique of Planned Parenthood as a systemic agent of cultural sin and evil. On the other, it requires compassionate advocacy for women and children, including tangible support through pregnancy centers, adoption services, and pastoral care. Ultimately, the paper will argue for a gospel-centered vision that integrates justice, mercy, and truth, calling the church to embody a culture of life that reflects Christ’s promise of abundant life (John 10:10). Methodologically, the paper employs a theological-ethical analysis that integrates biblical exegesis, moral philosophy, and evangelical public theology. This interdisciplinary approach ensures that the argument is both faithful to Scripture and engaged with contemporary cultural realities. In doing so, the study seeks not only to critique Planned Parenthood’s practices but also to offer constructive alternatives that witness to the transforming power of the gospel.

Biblical and Theological Foundations of Human Life

The foundation of any evangelical response to Planned Parenthood must begin with the biblical and theological affirmation of the sanctity of human life. Scripture consistently affirms that human beings are created by God, bear His image, and are therefore endowed with inherent dignity and worth. This doctrine provides the cornerstone for Christian ethics on life and directly challenges cultural narratives that treat human existence as disposable or subject to autonomous control. Without a clear understanding of the sanctity of life, Christians risk adopting a truncated ethic that fails to honor God’s creative authority or to safeguard the most vulnerable members of society.

The Sanctity of Life in Scripture

The biblical doctrine of creation situates humanity uniquely within the created order. Genesis 1:26–28 declares that humanity is made in the image of God, set apart from the rest of creation with the capacity to represent God’s rule and steward His world. As Jones observes, the imago Dei is not an abstract theological category but rather a concrete claim about the inherent dignity of every human being from conception onward. The divine image is not something gradually acquired but bestowed from the very beginning of human existence, making any attempt to deny personhood to the unborn a direct contradiction of Scripture's anthropology. The Psalms provide further testimony to God’s intimate involvement in human life. Psalm 139:13–16 poetically describes God’s active role in knitting each person together in the womb, underscoring that life is neither accidental nor self-generated but purposefully crafted by the Creator. As Alcorn emphasizes, this passage portrays God as both author and sustainer of life, making abortion a disruption of divine artistry. The psalmist’s wonder at God’s handiwork reinforces that life at every stage, both hidden in the womb or lived in the world, belongs ultimately to God.

There are a couple other passages, which reinforce this testimony. For instance, Jeremiah 1:5 records God’s call to the prophet before his birth. It reads, “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born, I consecrated you; I appointed you a prophet to the nations.” (Jeremiah 1:5, English Standard Version). Likewise, the book of Luke depicts John the Baptist leaping in Elizabeth’s womb upon encountering the unborn Christ. Luke 1:41-42 states, "And when Elizabeth heard the greeting of Mary, the baby leaped in her womb. And Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit, and she exclaimed with a loud cry, "Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb!" (Luke 1:41-42, English Standard Version). These texts collectively affirm that divine recognition of human personhood precedes birth and that the unborn are fully encompassed within God’s redemptive purposes. Gorman’s historical work confirms that the early church interpreted such texts as clear evidence of the moral status of unborn life, leading Christians to oppose abortion even when it was widely accepted in Greco-Roman society.

Theological Implications of God's Creative Authority

Theological implications flow from these scriptural foundations. According to Christian doctrine, human life is not the possession of individuals but a sacred trust from God. More specifically, life belongs to God, who alone has authority over its beginning and end; therefore, any human attempt to assert autonomy over life's boundaries represents an act of rebellion against the Creator. This theological conviction exposes the tension between biblical faith and Planned Parenthood’s ethos of autonomy. While Planned Parenthood frames abortion as a matter of reproductive freedom, Christian theology insists that human freedom is derivative and ordered toward God’s purposes, not self-sovereignty. As Bacote observes, the ethic of autonomy central to contemporary culture undermines the sanctity of life by severing moral decision-making from divine authority. This theological principle has significant ethical ramifications. If life is fundamentally God’s possession, then Christians are obligated to safeguard it, particularly when it is most vulnerable. Abortion is not simply a medical procedure; it is the taking of a life that God has created, sustained, and ordained. This perspective explains why many evangelical ethicists insist that the abortion debate cannot be reduced to competing rights claims. To frame the question solely in terms of the rights of women versus the rights of the unborn is to miss the deeper theological truth that all life belongs to God. Thus, abortion becomes less a matter of balancing competing interests and more a matter of faithfulness to the Creator.

Evangelical Ethics and Public Witness

Building on these theological foundations, evangelical ethicists emphasize the public dimension of the sanctity of life. Stassen and Gushee argue in Kingdom Ethics: Following Jesus in Contemporary Context that Christian discipleship entails protecting the vulnerable and marginalized as a reflection of God’s reign of justice and peace. For them, Jesus’ teaching in the Sermon on the Mount provides an ethic of radical peacemaking and protection for the powerless, which directly applies to defending unborn life. Within this framework, pro-life advocacy is not merely a cultural or political stance but a concrete expression of obedience to Christ’s call to care for the most vulnerable and for those who cannot defend themselves. Similarly, Hauerwas stresses that the church’s moral authority lies not in aligning with political agendas but in embodying an alternative community shaped by peace, justice, and reverence for life. The church’s task is not simply to argue against abortion in the public square but to live as a countercultural witness to God’s kingdom. This includes offering tangible support to women in crisis pregnancies, modeling communities of hospitality, and refusing to normalize cultural practices that treat life as expendable. Furthermore, evangelical theologians insist that the sanctity of life must be integrated into a holistic vision of justice. For instance, Camosy notes that many in younger generations are disillusioned with the polarization of the abortion debate and are seeking a consistent ethic of life that addresses both the unborn and the marginalized.

The Moral Foundation for Public Theology

The doctrine of the sanctity of human life thus functions as a moral foundation for evangelical public theology. Public theology, by definition, seeks to articulate Christian convictions in ways that engage cultural and political realities. Without grounding in the sanctity of life, evangelical engagement risks becoming either reactive moralism or partisan activism. By contrast, rooting public witness in God’s creative authority over life ensures that evangelical advocacy remains tethered to Scripture and oriented toward God’s kingdom. Neuhaus warned decades ago that when governments and cultural institutions abandon the sanctity of life, they inevitably erode the moral order they are called to protect. His warning resonates profoundly in the contemporary context, where Planned Parenthood and similar institutions redefine life in terms of autonomy and utility rather than divine gift. Evangelical public theology must therefore serve as a corrective, calling society back to an ethic grounded in God’s authority and the inviolable worth of every human being. In this way, the biblical and theological foundations of human life not only provide a critique of Planned Parenthood’s abortion ethic but also chart a positive vision for evangelical engagement. Human life is sacred because it is created by God, known by Him even in the womb, and destined for participation in His redemptive purposes. To deny this truth is to undermine the very fabric of Christian moral order. Evangelicals, therefore, are called not only to defend life in principle but also to embody practices of justice, mercy, and compassion that reflect the sanctity of life in the public square.

Planned Parenthood's Philosophy and Practices

To understand the significance of Planned Parenthood within the abortion debate, one must move beyond its clinical services and examine the philosophical and cultural ethos that undergirds its practices. Planned Parenthood is not merely a medical provider but an institution that embodies and promotes a particular moral vision of human life, autonomy, and reproductive freedom. By presenting abortion as an integral component of healthcare and women’s rights, the organization has cultivated a worldview that redefines human life in terms of choice and utility rather than divine gift and sacred trust. Its philosophy, shaped by the legacy of Margaret Sanger and the broader cultural currents of autonomy, has had far-reaching consequences not only in terms of policy and law but also in shaping the moral imagination of society.

Sanger began her career in the early 20th century as an activist for contraception, publishing The Woman Rebel and founding the American Birth Control League in 1921, which would later evolve into Planned Parenthood. Her rhetoric often framed reproduction in terms of control (i.e., eugenics) and liberation, presenting birth control as essential for women to escape poverty, oppression, and unwanted motherhood. Sanger’s philosophy, however, went far beyond a concern for women’s health. She was heavily influenced by the eugenics movement of her time, which sought to limit reproduction among populations considered undesirable. In her own words, Sanger once said, "We don't want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population." Similarly, she wrote, "The most urgent problem today is how to limit and discourage the over-fertility of the mentally and physically defective." To summarize the sheer depravity and vileness of Sanger's philosophy, a final quote of hers is as follows, "But for my view, I believe that there should be no more babies." While Sangers' defenders sometimes argue that her primary concern was women’s rights, critics have noted that her writings explicitly endorsed the use of birth control and sterilization as tools for social engineering. This aspect of Sanger’s legacy continues to cast a long shadow over Planned Parenthood. Pro-life critics argue that the organization’s disproportionate presence in minority communities and its ongoing defense of abortion reflect a continuation of Sanger’s utilitarian logic, in which the value of life is assessed according to its perceived social utility. It is no coincidence that the first Planned Parenthood was opened in Brownsville, New York, a predominantly minority neighborhood. Additionally, Fraser points out that while Planned Parenthood has sought to distance itself from Sanger’s more controversial views, the underlying commitment to autonomy and control over reproduction remains central to its identity.

From a theological perspective, Sanger’s philosophy represents a direct challenge to the biblical vision of stewardship. Whereas Christian theology insists that human life is a sacred trust from God, Sanger reframed it as raw material to be managed, controlled, and even eliminated in the pursuit of social progress. This type of philosophy exemplifies the modern ethic of autonomy, where freedom is conceived not as ordered toward God’s purposes but as radical self-idolization. This inversion of freedom transforms life from a gift into a commodity, making abortion appear not only permissible but essential to the exercise of personal and social autonomy. In recent years, Planned Parenthood has sought to acknowledge Sanger’s problematic legacy, even removing her name from certain clinics; however, the underlying philosophy she promoted (i.e., autonomy as the highest good and reproductive control as the means to achieve it) remains foundational to the organization’s mission. Therefore, evangelicals must recognize that Planned Parenthood’s defense of abortion is not merely a matter of healthcare policy but an outworking of a century-old philosophical commitment, which stands in fundamental opposition to biblical teaching.

The Ideological Foundation of Autonomy and Reproductive Rights

Planned Parenthood’s ethos is deeply rooted in the ideology of personal autonomy. This perspective views the individual as the final arbiter of moral and bodily decisions, with minimal constraints from divine authority or communal responsibility. Sanger, the founder of the organization that became Planned Parenthood, exemplified this philosophy through her promotion of birth control as a means of self-determination and liberation from perceived social and biological constraints. As Prior observes, Sanger’s vision was not merely about access to contraception but about constructing a worldview in which human reproduction could be fully subjected to the will of the autonomous individual. This ethos has since expanded to encompass abortion, framed as a necessary extension of reproductive rights. Planned Parenthood positions abortion not as an act of moral gravity but as an expression of healthcare and self-determination. For example, the organization’s website describes abortion as “a safe and common medical procedure” and emphasizes its role in enabling women to “control their lives and futures." This type of language reflects a secular anthropology in which human beings are defined primarily by their capacity for autonomous choice, rather than by their relationship to God or participation in a moral order beyond themselves.

The contrast with the biblical vision is stark, and the distinction between good and evil could not be any clearer. Whereas Scripture presents life as a sacred trust given by God, Planned Parenthood presents life as contingent upon the will of the mother. Oftentimes, pro-abortionists will not even acknowledge that the baby inside the womb is human despite this being a provable fact of science; a field they claim must be trusted at all costs. In this framework, the unborn child is not recognized as possessing inherent dignity but as subject to decisions based on convenience, health, or personal preference. Bacote argues that this kind of autonomy-centered ethic represents a fundamental departure from Christian ethics, which grounds moral decision-making in dependence upon and accountability to God. Planned Parenthood’s philosophical foundation thus represents not merely a different policy stance but a rival moral order that redefines the meaning of life, choice, and human responsibility.

Planned Parenthood's Role in Abortion Provision

While Planned Parenthood frequently highlights its range of healthcare services, such as cancer screenings, contraception, and sexual education, it remains the largest provider of abortion services in the United States. Reports consistently indicate that the organization performs hundreds of thousands of abortions annually. For instance, Live Action, a prominent pro-life organization, states that Planned Parenthood commits 1,102 abortions daily, which amounts to approximately 46 abortions every hour and one abortion every 78 seconds. Since the year 2000, Planned Parenthood has slaughtered 7.5 million babies while only providing 323,000 prenatal care services, and the organization has doubled its abortions from approximately 197,000 to 402,000. While taxpayer funding and abortions have dramatically increased, the other services offered by Planned Parenthood have severely decreased in recent years. This statistic points to the reality that the organization primarily focuses its efforts on murdering babies in the womb rather than providing mothers with the services needed to care for her unborn child. Furthermore, Live Action's website specifically refutes the "3%" claim propagated by Planned Parenthood when it states, "Sometimes we hear Planned Parenthood claim that abortion is only 3% or 4% of what they do. They get this figure by counting every single discrete operation as a "service" in order to inflate the number of services when compared to the abortion number." Additionally, Planned Parenthood says that abortion is the solution to situations involving rape, incest, or risk to the mother's life. According to the Charlotte Lozier Institute (CLI), however, these "exceptions" account for less than 5% of all abortions. More specifically, rape and incest account for 0.3%, risk to the woman's life or a major bodily function is 0.2%, abnormality in the unborn baby is 1.3%, and other physical health concerns are 2.5%. These statistics prove that the majority of abortions are not the direct result of the exceptions, which Planned Parenthood so often uses to manipulate societal beliefs on abortion.

As mentioned above, statistical analysis complicates Planned Parenthood’s narrative. Critics, such as Live Action, note that while non-abortion services are often counted multiple times (i.e., each birth control packet, STD test, or counseling session is tallied as a separate service), abortion procedures represent a disproportionately high percentage of its actual medical activities. Alcorn observes that such statistical framing serves to obscure the organization’s central role in normalizing and expanding abortion access across the nation. Planned Parenthood’s own advocacy demonstrates the centrality of abortion to its mission. Beyond providing the procedure, the organization actively lobbies for expanded abortion access, opposes restrictions such as waiting periods or parental consent laws, and litigates against state and federal pro-life legislation. As Williams notes, Planned Parenthood has functioned not only as a medical provider but also as a political force, shaping abortion policy at both state and national levels in ways that align with its philosophical commitment to autonomy. Thus, its role in the abortion debate extends far beyond clinical services to encompass cultural and legal advocacy that normalizes abortions as a social good.

Impact on Cultural Moral Imagination

Perhaps the most profound effect of Planned Parenthood lies in its influence on the moral imagination of society. By framing abortion as healthcare, Planned Parenthood reshapes public perception of the practice. Now, instead of being regarded as a morally tragic decision, abortion is presented as routine, safe, necessary, and even empowering. This reframing has profound implications for how individuals and communities think about life, responsibility, and morality. Cahill has argued that the abortion debate in modern culture often reduces moral discourse to a dichotomy between individual autonomy and communal responsibility, with Planned Parenthood firmly positioned on the side of autonomy. Unfortunately, this framing not only diminishes the moral gravity of abortion but also weakens social bonds, as the communal responsibility to protect the vulnerable is eclipsed by the prioritization of individual choice.

The normalization of abortion also shapes younger generations’ understanding of life and sexuality. As Arbo contends, institutions like Planned Parenthood have been instrumental in forming a cultural imagination in which abortion is integrated into the narrative of reproductive health and sexual freedom. In such a context, the unborn child becomes invisible in moral discourse, and the practice of abortion is abstracted from its reality as the termination of a developing human life. This reconfiguration of the moral imagination has consequences for evangelical engagement. More specifically, if abortion is perceived as ordinary healthcare, then opposition to it appears not as a defense of life but as an infringement upon personal rights. Thus, evangelicals face the challenge of articulating a counter-vision that restores the moral visibility of the unborn.

Evangelical Public-Theological Response

Due to the pervasive influence of Planned Parenthood’s philosophy and practices, evangelicals are called to respond in ways that are both prophetically faithful and pastorally compassionate. Public theology requires engaging cultural institutions not merely on pragmatic grounds but through a robust biblical and ethical framework that communicates God’s truth in the public square. Evangelicals must therefore resist the temptation to reduce their witness to political activism alone and instead embody a holistic response that critiques systemic sin, advocates for women and children, and proclaims a gospel-centered vision for a culture of life.

Prophetic Critique of Systemic Sin

Planned Parenthood represents not merely individual moral failures but a systemic cultural sin that undermines the sanctity of life. Beckwith highlights that the abortion debate cannot be reduced to private preference or even contested definitions of “personhood,” because the fetus is biologically and morally continuous with the human community. To deny this reality is to engage in a form of cultural deception, one that legalizes and normalizes the destruction of innocent human life. Evangelicals, following the prophetic tradition of Scripture, must expose this systemic sin for what it is: a violation of God’s justice and a distortion of human dignity. George and Tollefsen strengthen this critique by arguing that embryos are not potential human beings but actual human beings at the earliest stage of development. Their philosophical defense makes clear that Planned Parenthood’s abortion ethic is built on a false anthropology, one that arbitrarily assigns value based on stage of development, dependency, or maternal choice. Evangelicals can draw on this reasoning in their public witness, demonstrating that abortion represents not only a theological offense against God’s creative authority but also a rational contradiction of the very concept of human rights and scientific understanding. Furthermore, Smith adds that Planned Parenthood’s normalization of abortion fits within a broader “culture of death” in which vulnerable lives whether unborn, disabled, or elderly are devalued in the name of autonomy and efficiency. By exposing the systemic logic that treats the human life as disposable, evangelicals can call society to repentance and to renewed fidelity to a culture of life grounded in divine authority.

Compassionate Advocacy for Women and Children

While prophetic critique is essential, evangelicals must also recognize the pastoral dimension of abortion. There are women who seek Planned Parenthood services due to fear, poverty, or lack of support; however, the church also has to acknowledge that many of them do so out of a willful understanding of their actions. Pastors, such as Jeff Durbin of Apologia Church and John Amanchukwu of the Upper Room Church of God in Christ, can attest that most women they speak to outside of abortion mills are fully aware of what they are there to do, which is to end the life of their unborn child. Kaczor emphasizes that a consistent ethic of life must go beyond condemnation of abortion to include positive support for women, ensuring that they have the resources and community necessary to embrace motherhood. Evangelical churches, therefore, are called not only to protest abortion but also to embody compassion through crisis pregnancy centers, adoption support, financial assistance, and discipleship. This dual response of critique and compassion reflects the heart of the gospel itself since Jesus consistently confronted systemic injustice while also extending mercy to the marginalized. Evangelical public theology must follow this pattern, combining clarity of conviction with tangible acts of love. In doing so, the church communicates that opposition to abortion is not about denying women’s dignity but about affirming both their worth and the worth of their children in the eyes of God.

A Gospel-Centered Vision for a Life-Affirming Culture

Ultimately, evangelical public theology must offer more than critique; it must articulate a constructive vision for a culture of life rooted in the gospel. George and Tollefsen’s defense of the embryo underscores that this dignity extends from conception, demanding protection by both law and culture. Furthermore, Kaczor’s emphasis on justice highlights that the unborn are not merely “private concerns” but members of the human community to whom society owes obligations. The "culture of death" we are currently immersed in reminds evangelicals that defending life at its earliest stages is inseparable from protecting it across all stages. As believers, the work of Christians continues throughout the life of an individual, not just as its earliest stages. Thus, a gospel-centered vision of life must affirm that Christ is the fullness of life (John 10:10), and that His kingdom calls His people to embody justice, mercy, and peace. Evangelical public theology, therefore, seeks not only to end abortion but also to nurture communities where families are supported, women are empowered with life-giving alternatives, and every child is welcomed as a gift from God.

Conclusion

Planned Parenthood’s promotion and facilitation of abortion reflect a systemic violation of the biblical doctrine of the sanctity of human life. By advancing an ethic of autonomy that detaches personhood from divine authority, it undermines God’s creative sovereignty over human existence and normalizes a cultural vision of life rooted in self-determination rather than sacred stewardship. At the same time, its role as the leading abortion provider and cultural advocate has deeply shaped public imagination, redefining abortion as healthcare and obscuring the moral gravity of the practice. The thesis of this paper has been that Planned Parenthood’s abortion ethic is incompatible with the biblical vision of life, which affirms that every human being is created in the image of God, known by Him from the womb, and entrusted to humanity as a sacred gift. Because of this, evangelicals cannot remain silent in the face of an institution that advances practices and philosophies contrary to God’s design. The appropriate response is twofold: prophetic critique and compassionate advocacy. On one hand, evangelicals must speak with moral clarity, calling abortion what it is: a violation of the sanctity of life and an offense against God’s sovereign authority. On the other, they must extend mercy and tangible support to women and families, demonstrating that the church offers life-affirming alternatives rooted in love, justice, and hope. This dual posture reflects the character of the gospel itself, which unites truth and grace, conviction and compassion. In embodying such a response, evangelicals participate in God’s redemptive mission, offering the world a counter-vision that values every life as sacred. Ultimately, to uphold the sanctity of life is to bear witness to the Creator who forms life, the Redeemer who gives life, and the Spirit who sustains life. By proclaiming and practicing a culture of life, the church declares that every human being (i.e., born and unborn) matters to God and is worthy of protection, dignity, and love.